Indian Journal of Physiotherapy & Occupational Therapy-An International Journal

Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access
Open Access Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Restricted Access Subscription Access

Hand Grip Strength: Normative Data for Young Adults


Affiliations
1 Amity Institute of Physiotherapy, Amity University, Sector – 44, Noida – 201301 (U.P), India
     

   Subscribe/Renew Journal


Background: The reliable and valid evaluation of handgrip strength is of great importance in determining the affectivity of different treatment strategies and procedures. It is widely accepted that grip strength provides an objective index of the functional integrity of upper extremity. Many treatment protocols compare the strength of the injured limb with that of uninjured limb or compare with normative data of same group individuals. There are controversies regarding the difference in the handgrip strength between dominant and non-dominant hand in the left and right-hand dominant people.

Purpose of The Study: The main objective of this study is to establish the normative data of young adults for their handgrip strength.

Material and Method: Study includes 100 healthy (both Right and left-handed) subjects between the age group of 18 to 25 years with mean age 21.02 + 1.99 years. Handgrip strength of the subjects was measured using Hand held Dynamometer (ICC=0.9994).

Results: The results were analyzed using students 't' and the average dominant handgrip strength in young adults was found to be 29.30 + 9.772 kgs and for non-dominant hand 27.88 + 10.012 kgs, which was statically significant (t = 8.539, p = .001).

Conclusion: We conclude that the handgrip strength of male is greater than that of female. There was an overall handgrip strength difference of 7.2% in favor of dominant hand.


Keywords

Handgrip Strength, Hand Dominance, Jamar Dynamometer.
Subscription Login to verify subscription
User
Notifications
Font Size


  • Scott D. McPhee. Functional hand evolution: A Review. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy: 1987: 158 – 163.

  • Kapandji. I.P, The Physiology of the joints, Vol 1: 5th edition: Churchill Livingston: U.K: 1995.

  • Shechtman.O, Mann W. C, Justiss M.D, Tomita M; Grip strength in the frail elderly, American Journal Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 2004: 83: 819 – 826.

  • Pamela K, Levangie, Cynthia.C Norkin, Joint Structure & Function, A Comprehensive Analysis, 3rd edition: Jaypee Brothers: New Delhi: 2001.

  • Talsania J.S & Kozin S.H, Normal digital contribution to grip strength assed by a computerized digital dynamometer. Journal of Hand Surgery: 1998: 23B: 162 – 166.

  • Peterson, P., Petrick, M., Connor, H. & Conklin.D. Grip strength and hand dominance: challenging the 10% rule. American Journal of Occupational Therapy: 1989: Vol 43 (7): 444-447.

  • Innes .Ev, Handgrip strength tasting: A Review of Literature: The Australian Journal of occupational Therapy, 1999: 46: 120 – 140.

  • Blair, S. J., McCormik, E., Bear-Lehman, J., Fess, E.E., & Rader, E. evaluation of impairment of the upper extremity. Clinical Orthopeadics and related Research.1987: 221: 42-58.

  • Berryhill, B.H Returning the worker with an upper extremity injury to industry. A model for the physician and therapist. Journal of Hand Therapy. 1990: 3: 56- 63.

  • Blankenship, K.L. The Blankenship system functional capacity evaluation: the procedure manual: 2nd ed. Macon: the Blankenship corporation.

  • Sheehan, N. J., Sheldon, F., & Marks, D. Grip strength and torquometry in the assessment of the hand function in-patient with RA. British Journal of Rheumatology.1983: 22: 159-164.

  • Balogun, J, A. Assessment of physical fitness of female physical therapy student. Journal of Orthopedic and Sports Physical Therapy.1987: 8: 525-532.

  • Stokes H.M, the Seriously uninjured hand – weakness of grip. Journal of occupational Medicine. 1983: 25: 683 – 684.

  • Mathiowetz. V, Reliability and validity of grip and pinch strength measurements. Critical Review in Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine, 1991: 2: 201 – 212.

  • Fess, E. E. guidelines for evaluating assessment instruments. Journal of Hand Therapy. 1995: 8: 144- 148.

  • Smith, R.O., & Benge, M.W, Pinch and grasp strength: standardization of terminology and protocol. American Journal of Occupational Therapy. 1985: 39: 531-535.

  • Mathiowetz, V., Weber, K., Vollaqnd, G., & Kashman, N. Reliability and validity of grip and pinch strength evaluations. Journal of Hand Surgery. 1984: 9A: 222-226.

  • Fess E. E, A method to check the Jamar dynamometer calibration. Journal of Hand Therapy. 1987: 1: 28 – 32.

  • American Society of hand therapy. Clinical assessment recommendations: 2nd edition: Chicago: Author: 1992.

  • American Medical Association; Guides to evaluation of permanent impairments: 4th edition: Chicago: Author: 1993.

  • Gilbertson L & Barber-Lomax S. Power and pinch grip strength recorded using hand held Jamar dynamometer and B-L hydraulic pinch gauge: British normative data for adults, British journal of occupational therapy. 1994: 57: 483 – 488.

  • Desrosiers. J, Bravo. G, Hebert. R, Dutil. E, Normative data for grip strength of elderly men and women. American journal of occupational therapy. 1995a: 49: 637 – 644.

  • Armstrong C. A & Oldham J. A, A comparison of dominant and non-dominant hand strength. Journal of Hand Surgery (British). 1999: 24B: 4: 421 – 425.

  • Phillips C. A; The management of patients with rheumatoid arthritis, Rehabilitation of the Hand: Surgery & Therapy: St. Louis: Mosby: 1990: 903 – 907.

  • Bechtol C. O; The use of a dynamometer with adjustable handle spacing. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. 1954: 36A: 324 – 832.

  • Mandell R. J, Nelson D. L and Clemark S. A, Differential laterality of hand function in right-handed and lefthanded boys. American journal of occupational therapy. 1984: 38: 114 – 120.

  • Fess E. E, Documentation: Essential elements of an upper extremity assessment pattern. Rehabilitation of the hand: surgery and therapy. 4th edition: Vol 1: St. Louis: Mosby: 1995a: 185 – 214.

  • Anita Clerke and Jonathan Clerke. A review of the effect of handedness on isometric grip strength differences of the left and right hands. American journal of occupational therapy. 2001: 55: (2): 206 – 211.

  • Firrell, J. C., & Crain, G. M. Which setting of the dynamometer provides maximal grip strength? Journal of Hand Surgery.1996: 21A: 397 - 401.

  • McGarvey.S.R, Morrey B.F, Askew L.J. Reliabity of isometrics strength testing: Temporal factors and strength variation. Clinical orthopedics and related research.1984: 185: 301-305.

  • Johansson C.A, Kent B.E & Shepard K.F. Relationship between verbal command volume and magnitude of muscle contraction. Physical Therapy. 1983: 63: 1260-1265.

  • Mathiowetz, V., Weber, K., Vollaqnd, G., & Kashman, N, Reliability and validity of grip and pinch strength evaluations. Journal of Hand Surgery. 1984: 9A: 222- 226.

  • Trossman, P.B., & Li, P.W. The effect of the duration of intertrial rest periods on isometric grip strength performance in young adults. Occupational Therapy Journal of Research.1989: 9: 362-378.

  • Lunde B. K, Brewer W. D and Gracia P. A. Grip strength of college women. Archives of Physical Medicine Rehabilitation. 1972: 53: 491 – 493.

  • Thorgren K. G and Werner C. O. Normal grip strength. Acta Orthopaedica Scandinavica. 1979: 50: 255 – 259.

  • Crosby, C.A., Wehbe, M. A., & Mawr, B. Hand strength: Normative values. Journal of Hand Surgery. 1994: 19A: 665 - 670.

  • Harkonen R., Piirotomaa M. & Alaranta H. Grip strength and hand position of the dynamometer in 294 Finnish adults. Journal Hand Surgery. 1993: 18B: 129-132.

  • Harth A. & Vetter W.R. Grip and pinch strength among selected adult occupational groups. Occupational Therapy International. 1994: 1: 13-28.

  • Jarjour. N, Lathrop. J, Meller. T.E, Roberts. K.S, Sopezak. J.M, Van Genderen. K .J & Moyers. P. The 10% rule: Grip strength and hand dominance in a factory population. Work.1997: 8: 83-91.

  • Agnew .P & Mass .F. Hand function related to age and sex. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation. 1982: 63: 269-271.

  • Robertson .L.D, Mullinax .C.M, Brodowiez .G.R, Swafford. A.R. Muscular fatigue patterning power grip assessment. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation. 1996: 6: 71-85.


Abstract Views: 1009

PDF Views: 0




  • Hand Grip Strength: Normative Data for Young Adults

Abstract Views: 1009  |  PDF Views: 0

Authors

Nitesh Bansal
Amity Institute of Physiotherapy, Amity University, Sector – 44, Noida – 201301 (U.P), India

Abstract


Background: The reliable and valid evaluation of handgrip strength is of great importance in determining the affectivity of different treatment strategies and procedures. It is widely accepted that grip strength provides an objective index of the functional integrity of upper extremity. Many treatment protocols compare the strength of the injured limb with that of uninjured limb or compare with normative data of same group individuals. There are controversies regarding the difference in the handgrip strength between dominant and non-dominant hand in the left and right-hand dominant people.

Purpose of The Study: The main objective of this study is to establish the normative data of young adults for their handgrip strength.

Material and Method: Study includes 100 healthy (both Right and left-handed) subjects between the age group of 18 to 25 years with mean age 21.02 + 1.99 years. Handgrip strength of the subjects was measured using Hand held Dynamometer (ICC=0.9994).

Results: The results were analyzed using students 't' and the average dominant handgrip strength in young adults was found to be 29.30 + 9.772 kgs and for non-dominant hand 27.88 + 10.012 kgs, which was statically significant (t = 8.539, p = .001).

Conclusion: We conclude that the handgrip strength of male is greater than that of female. There was an overall handgrip strength difference of 7.2% in favor of dominant hand.


Keywords


Handgrip Strength, Hand Dominance, Jamar Dynamometer.

References