Position- and Sex-Related Differences in Sagittal and Frontal Plane Concentric Isokinetic Hip Muscle Peak Torques and Agonist-Antagonist Ratios.
Lisa T Hoglund, Matthew C Schiffino, James E Freels and 1 others
PMID 39502543WHAT IT FOUND
Hip extensor and abductor peak torques were greater when tested lying down compared to standing.
Flexion-extension ratios were higher in standing. Test results from different positions should not be compared directly or against normative data from the other position.
Key findings
01Normalized peak torques for hip extension and hip abduction were significantly greater when participants were tested in recumbent positions compared to standing positions.
02The hip flexion-to-extension ratio was significantly greater when participants were tested in the standing position compared to the recumbent position.
03There were no significant differences in normalized peak torques or agonist-antagonist ratios between males and females.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTsWhat it means for SLPs
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
Participants were young, healthy adults, so results may not generalize to patients with hip or knee pathologies or older adults. Only the dominant leg was tested. Examiners were not blinded to torque values during testing. Electromyography was not used, so it is unknown if compensatory muscles contributed to the torque produced.
Declared interests
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume that higher torque values in a lying-down test indicate greater functional strength than a standing test. The position itself changes the measured output, so these numbers are not interchangeable.