Reliability assessment and correlation analysis of 3 protocols to measure trunk muscle strength and endurance

Abstract

Different methods have been developed to quantify trunk muscle strength and endurance. However, some important protocol characteristics are still unclear, hindering the selection of the most suitable tests in each specific situation. The aim of this study was to examine the reliability and the relationship between 3 representative tests of the most common type of protocols used to assess trunk muscle strength and endurance. Twenty-seven healthy men performed each test twice spaced 1 month apart. Trunk strength and endurance were evaluated with an isokinetic dynamometer and 2 field tests including Biering-Sørensen test and Flexion–rotation trunk test. All tests showed a good relative consistency (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC]> 0.75), except for the isokinetic endurance variables which had low–moderate reliability (0.37 < ICC > 0.65). Absolute reliability seemed slightly better in the isokinetic protocol than in the field tests, which showed about 12% of test–retest score increase. No significant correlations were found between test scores. After a familiarisation period for the field tests, the 3 protocols can be used to obtain reliable measures of trunk muscle strength and endurance. Based on the correlation analysis, these measures are not related, which highlights the importance of selecting the most suitable trunk test for each situation.