Measuring Hand Intrinsic Muscle Strength: Normal Values and Interrater Reliability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The intrinsic muscles of the hand are of interest in spinal cord injury (SCI) and other myelopathies, because they are innervated by the most caudal cord segments innervating the upper limb. In addition, abnormalities of the peripheral nervous system, such as peripheral nerve entrapments, often affect hand intrinsic muscle strength of SCI patients. Therefore, measuring hand intrinsic strength may allow for early diagnosis of neurologic decline. METHODS: A method was developed for measuring strength of hand intrinsic muscles with a handheld myometer. With the use of a handheld myometer, this study examined the distribution of strength measurements for second-digit abductors, fifth-digit abductors, and thumb opposers in able-bodied participants and in individuals with weakness. The quantitative measurements were compared with manual muscle test scores and interrater reliability is described for these hand intrinsic strength measurements. Thirty-one able-bodied individuals participated (17 men, 14 women; mean age = 37.7 years). In addition, 24, patients with SCI participated (23 men, 1 woman; mean age = 53.5 years; 9 with paraplegia and 14 with tetraplegia as a primary diagnosis). The Bland-Altman method was used to test for interrater reliability. RESULTS: Mean strength of able-bodied participants was 5.0 kg for second-digit abduction, 3.1 kg for fifth-digit abduction, and 5.0 kg for thumb opposition, and the lower limits of normal were 3.0, 1.8, and 3.4 kg, respectively. The 95th percentile of interrater differences were 29.3% for second-digit abduction, 38.5% for fifth-digit abduction, and 43.7% for thumb opposition. CONCLUSION: Abnormal hand intrinsic strength should be suspected if values are lower than the 5th percentile values listed above or if strength change exceeds the 95th percentile for interrater differences shown above. These quantitative hand strength measurements may allow for earlier diagnosis of secondary neurologic complications and may aid in monitoring neurologic recovery in persons with SCI.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".