Avaliação da força de preensão manual: revisão sistemática

• Autor(a) principal: Basso, Fernanda Manenti
• Data de Publicação: 2022
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UFSCAR
• Texto Completo: https://repositorio.ufscar.br/handle/ufscar/16770
• topic: Aperto da mão; Força da mão; Dinamômetro de força muscular; Dinamometria; Handshake; Hand strength; Muscle strength dynamometer; Dynamometry; CIENCIAS DA SAUDE::FISIOTERAPIA E TERAPIA OCUPACIONAL

Introduction: Demonstrate clinical testing and verify essential assessment tools for physical therapists. Hand grip strength (HGS) is a rapid method of measuring upper grip strength and is also used to assess global muscle strength. HGS is measured using dynamometers, the Jamar® hydraulic dynamometer being the most used and considered by the American Society of Hand Therapists (ASHT) as the “gold standard” for evaluation. Objective: To carry out a systematic review to identify gaps in the HGS assessment performed by portable means of manual dynamometers and interpretation of their results. Method: Studies published up to January 1981 were published from January 2021: they were based on a dynamometer of the keywords (Handgrip OR hand strength OR muscle strength OR dynamometer AND test hand Strength) in the databases: Pubmed, Embase Web of Science. Studies in Spanish and English that evaluated HGS were included. Results: 12,371 articles were identified, of which 252 were duplicates, of which 10,763 were excluded after reading the title and abstract, resulting in 1356 articles. Of these, 373 were excluded for not having access to the content. A total of 983 articles were selected for full reading, from which those that did not meet the eligibility criteria were excluded, resulting in 46 articles in the review. The age group ranged from 4 to 60 years in 69.56% of the articles and 60 years or over in 30.43% of the articles included. As for the dynamometer brand, 56.52% used the Jamar® brand and 43.47% used other dynamometer brands. The results indicate that there is great variability in the methods used in the evaluation of HGS and in the interpretation of its results, with 45.65% of the articles using HGS in order to assess the upper limbs, 10.86% sarcopenia; 2.17% nutritional status and 10.86% overall muscle strength. Conclusion: Despite the ASHT recommendations, there are still studies that do not follow them, which can generate bias in the performance of the test and in the interpretation of the results obtained, making it difficult to compare studies.