Do Finger Flexor Exercises Effectively Activate the Dynamic Stabilizers of the Medial Elbow?
Malachy McHugh, Michael Mullaney, Lindsey Fhima and 2 others
Rubber band finger flexion recruited the two target elbow muscles more selectively than a finger flexor dynamometer, and ring finger flexion with rubber bands produced the highest flexor carpi ulnaris activation.
Findings come from nine healthy non-pitchers.
Key findings
1FCU activation during ring finger flexion was significantly higher with rubber bands (64±19% MVC) than with the finger flexor dynamometer (43±17% MVC); no other device-by-muscle-by-finger comparison reached significance.
2Rubber band finger flexion selectively activated FCU and FDS over pronator teres for all three fingers tested, whereas the dynamometer showed no significant differences among the three muscles for middle and ring finger flexion.
3Participants were nine healthy adults, not baseball pitchers, and the authors state that activation patterns in pitchers may differ and should be examined in future work.
Still to come
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
Only nine participants, all healthy adults with no history of elbow injury or overhead-throwing sport; the authors explicitly state that activation patterns in baseball pitchers may differ and should be studied separately. The two devices were tested in different forearm positions (supinated for the dynamometer, pronated for the rubber bands), which affects the length-tension relationship and may have influenced the activation differences. The rubber band exercise included a concentric phase before the isometric hold that was compared, and the authors acknowledge this prior movement may have affected the measured activation. The finger flexor dynamometer reports force in arbitrary units that could not be calibrated to Newtons, so absolute force values for that device were not reported. Little finger flexion was only tested on the dynamometer because the rubber band resistance exceeded most subjects' flexion strength, so no device comparison is possible for that finger. A single tester performed all measurements in one laboratory; no blinding of participants to the device condition is described.
Declared interests
The authors report no conflicts of interest. No funding source is named in the text provided.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read the single significant difference (higher FCU activation with rubber bands during ring finger flexion) as proof that rubber bands are the superior exercise for medial elbow stability. The study had only nine healthy non-pitchers, the two devices were tested in different forearm positions, and the authors themselves note that activation patterns in actual baseball pitchers may be different. This is a pilot-level comparison, not evidence to replace one training tool with another.
Summarised by AI from the full paper, without a clinician reviewing it. Check it against the source before it changes what you do. Read it on PubMed →