Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorSutherland, Edwina
dc.contributor.authorKahn, Michelle
dc.contributor.authorWilliams, Gavin
dc.date.accessioned2021-02-05T11:16:59Z
dc.date.available2021-02-05T11:16:59Z
dc.date.issued2020
dc.identifier.citationSutherland, E., Kahn, M., Williams, G. (2020). Which test is best? Strength testing neurological rehabilitation. Epworth HealthCare Research Month 2020, Epworth Research Institute, Victoria, Australia. Hentet fra http://hdl.handle.net/11434/1889en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11250/2726404
dc.description.abstractMuscle weakness is the primary impairment affecting people with neurological conditions. Despite its significance to both clinicians and patients, the gold standard measure is largely restricted to laboratory settings for research purposes. Therefore, measuring muscle strength in a clinical setting is a common challenge. Our current tests often lack specificity, they are not clinically feasible nor responsive to important changes in function. While our findings show the LC leg press test to be the most appropriate test for this cohort, it is clear that a perfect clinical measure of lower limb muscle strength does not exist. Clinicians must balance the clinical utility of MMT and field testing (STS), alongside the more psychometrically sound LC test and HHD and continue to bridge the gap between current gold-standard measurements and practical clinical options.en_US
dc.publisherEpworth Research Instituteen_US
dc.subjectstrength testingen_US
dc.subjectneurological rehabilitationen_US
dc.subjectmuscle weaknessen_US
dc.subjectnevrologiske lidelseren_US
dc.titleWhich test is best? Strength testing neurological rehabilitationen_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.source.journalEpworth HealthCare Researchen_US
dc.description.localcodemåsjekkes


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel