App-Guided Grip Strength Assessment: Feasibility and Validity of Self-administered Testing with a Smart Dynamometer
Francis, G.; DeTreux, K.; Enright, M.; George, L.; Lambrides, Y.; Mangudi Varadarajan, K.; Tsui, W.
Show abstract
IntroductionRemote grip strength assessment offers potential for scalable at-home health monitoring, yet most validated methods require in-person supervision. The Squegg Smart Dynamometer is a Bluetooth-enabled device designed for both supervised and remote app-guided, self-administered testing. Validating self-administered grip strength assessment is essential for clinical and research use. This study evaluated whether self-administered grip strength measurements with the Squegg device are comparable to supervised testing, and examined the influence of participant and procedural factors. MethodsIn this prospective, within-subject comparative study, 96 healthy adults completed grip strength tests with the Squegg device under two modalities: self-administered (app-guided) and supervised (by trained personnel). Covariates included sex, hand dominance, age, education, prior grip testing experience, and test order. Analyses included Shapiro-Wilk tests, ANOVA, and Bland-Altman analysis. ResultsGrip strength residuals met normality assumptions. Guidance modality (self-administered vs. supervised) had no significant effect (F1,270 = 1.41, p = 0.24). The mean difference between modalities was 0.68 lbs relative to an average grip strength of 83.4 lbs (95% CI: -1.77 to 0.41). Sex explained 45% of between-subject variation. Within subjects, variation was associated with hand dominance (6%), test order (4%), and guidance modality (0.4%). No significant effects were observed for age, education, or prior device experience. Bland-Altman analysis showed consistent agreement across the grip strength range. ConclusionsSelf-administered grip strength assessments with the Squegg Smart Dynamometer are comparable to supervised testing, supporting its potential for remote patient monitoring. Future work should confirm findings in broader populations, home settings, and longitudinal contexts.
Matching journals
The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Validity and reliability of an app-based medical device to empower individuals in evaluating their physical capacities 96%
- Gaze and Movement Assessment (GaMA): Inter-site validation of a visuomotor upper limb functional protocol 95%
- Randomized, Crossover Clinical Trial on the Safety, Feasibility, and Usability of the ABLE Exoskeleton: A Comparative Study with Knee-Ankle-Foot Orthoses 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Closed-loop stimulation of lateral cervical spinal cord in upper-limb amputees to enable sensory discrimination 94%
- The Ramp protocol: Uncovering individual differences in walking to an auditory beat using TeensyStep 94%
- Playing the piano with a robotic third thumb: Assessing constraints of human augmentation 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Cohort Profile: Baseline characteristics and design of the McMaster Monitoring My Mobility (MacM3) Study, a prospective digital mobility cohort of community-dwelling older Canadians from Southern Ontario 93%
- Wireless physical activity monitor use among adults living with HIV in a community-based exercise intervention study: a quantitative longitudinal observational study 92%
- HEART rate variability biofeedback for LOng Covid symptoms (HEARTLOC): protocol for a feasibility study 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Evaluation of a Machine Learning Approach Utilizing Wearable Data for Prediction of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Healthcare Workers 89%
- Standardizing Phenotypic Algorithms for the Classification of Degenerative Rotator Cuff Tear from Electronic Health Record Systems 89%
- Evaluation of Eye-tracking for a Decision Support Application 88%
Similar papers in this journal
- Validation of a smartphone embedded inertial measurement unit for measuring postural stability in older adults 95%
- Synergies analysis produces consistent results between motion analysis laboratories 93%
- Differences in centre of mass measurements between markerless and marker-based motion capture systems during balance and mobility assessments in individuals with chronic and sub-acute stroke 93%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.