Reliability and Measurement Error of Instrument-Based Methods to Assess Ankle Evertor Strength: A Systematic Review.
Aude Aguilaniu, Stéphanie Grosdent, Cédric Schwartz et al.
✦ AI-curated · Sources linked
In 30 seconds
This systematic review assessed the reliability and measurement error of instrument-based methods for measuring ankle evertor strength. It included 23 studies identified from 4047 records; 90% of participants were healthy and 10% had lateral ankle sprain. Reliability met the review’s sufficiency threshold in 83% of extracted values, but measurement error was sufficiently low in only 34%. Isokinetic dynamometry, particularly isometric testing, showed the most consistent reliability and lowest measurement error. The review also found that selected protocol parameters influenced measurement error or interrater reliability.
Key findings
- Reliability was sufficient in 83% of extracted values, compared with sufficient measurement error in 34%.
- Isokinetic dynamometry, especially isometric testing, had the most consistent reliability and lowest measurement error.
- Contraction velocity, knee position, and verbal encouragement influenced test-retest measurement error; knee position and stabilization influenced interrater reliability.
- Methodological quality was rated adequate in 35% of studies, doubtful in 39%, and inadequate in 26%.
Why it matters
Strength measurements can inform rehabilitation and return-to-sport decisions after lateral ankle sprain, but reliability alone does not ensure that observed changes exceed measurement error. The review highlights that measurement performance varies by instrument and protocol, so clinicians and researchers should consider both reliability and error when interpreting ankle evertor strength results.
What to keep in mind
Most participants were healthy, with only 10% having lateral ankle sprain. Methodological quality varied, and 26% of studies were rated inadequate.