Inter-instrument reliability for hand dynamometry and spirometry: raw data

This record describes the data for the dominant handgrip strength (DHGS) and lung function of apparently healthy adults (aged between 18 and 80 years) using different hand dynamometers and spirometers, respectively. This data was collected across three regional health facilities to assess the inter-instrument reliability between different brands of hand dynamometers and spirometers routinely used in clinical practice. At each facility, each participant completed dynamometry and spirometry assessments using a local and reference device (hand dynamometers and spirometers). Only the DHGS was assessed while the lung function assessment included the forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) and the peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR).
Four hand dynamometers were involved in this study: Three Jamar hydraulic dynamometers; (Model 5030J1, Performance Health, China; Model J00105, Sammons Preston, Bolingbrook, IL and Model 5030JI, Patterson Medical, Warrenville, IL) and the CAMRY electronic dynamometer (Model EH101, Zhongshan Camry Electronic Co., Ltd, China). The Jamar hydraulic dynamometer (Performance Health) was utilised as the reference device at each facility, while the other three dynamometers were the local devices. DHGS was assessed with participants in a seated position with elbow placed in 90 degrees flexion in accordance with the American Society of Hand Therapist guidelines (ASHT). The Jamar dynamometers were set in the second handle position, as recommended by the ASHT while the Camry dynamometer was adjusted to the third position. Three measurement trials were undertaken for the dominant hand to achieve a rest phase of at least 15 seconds after every trial. Each trial did not last more than six seconds with the highest value recorded as the participant’s DHGS.
Four spirometers were involved in this study: Vitalograph ALPHA spirometer (Model 6000, Vitalograph Ltd, Ireland); EasyOne spirometer (Model 2001, ndd Medical Technologies, Switzerland); CONTEC spirometer (Model SP10, CONTEC Medical systems Ltd, China) and Microlab spirometer (CareFusion, Yorba Linda, CA, USA). The Vitalograph-ALPHA spirometer was utilised as the reference device at each facility, while the other three spirometers were the local spirometers. A disposable mouthpiece was used for each participant during this assessment and standardised guidelines of the American Thoracic Society (ATS) and European Respiratory Society (ERS) were followed. These guidelines required participants to sit upright, apply a nose clip, rapidly inhale fully through the mouth followed by maximal exhalation through the mouthpiece until complete lung discharge. Three lung function indices, forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1), forced vital capacity (FVC) and peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) were assessed. Assessments included three trials, with the highest value for FEV1, FVC and PEFR utilised in analyses, in accordance with the ATS/ERS repeatability and acceptability criteria.
Data analysis Inter-instrument reliability was assessed (using SPSS version 27.0) as shown below:

paired t-tests (for normally distributed data) or Wilcoxon signed-ranks test (for non-normally distributed data) and the intra-class correlation (ICC)
technical error of measurement (TEM) and coefficient of variability (CV)
Bland Altman plots and limits of agreement

Following the analyses, hand dynamometers were considered reliable for measuring DHGS if they fulfilled all of the following four criteria: 1) there was no significant difference between mean values 2) the ICC value was >0.90 3) relative TEM and CV values were

本数据集收录了分别使用不同握力计与肺量计测得的、年龄18~80岁的表面健康成年人的优势手握力量（Dominant Handgrip Strength, DHGS）与肺功能数据，旨在评估临床常规使用的不同品牌握力计与肺量计间的仪器间信度。在每家医疗机构中，每名受试者均分别使用一台本地设备与一台参考设备（握力计、肺量计）完成握力测试与肺量测定评估。本研究仅测量优势手握力量，而肺功能评估则包含用力肺活量（Forced Vital Capacity, FVC）、一秒用力呼气容积（Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second, FEV1）与峰流速（Peak Expiratory Flow Rate, PEFR）。

本研究共纳入4台握力计：3台Jamar液压握力计（型号5030J1，Performance Health公司，中国；型号J00105，Sammons Preston公司，美国伊利诺伊州博林布鲁克；型号5030JI，Patterson Medical公司，美国伊利诺伊州沃伦维尔），以及1台CAMRY电子握力计（型号EH101，中山嘉玛电子有限公司，中国）。每家医疗机构均以Performance Health品牌的Jamar液压握力计作为参考设备，其余3台握力计作为本地测试设备。优势手握力量的测试按照美国手治疗师协会（American Society of Hand Therapists, ASHT）的指南进行，受试者取坐位，肘关节屈曲90度。按照ASHT的推荐，Jamar握力计调节至第二握柄档位，而CAMRY握力计则调节至第三档位。优势手的测试共进行3次，每次测试后受试者需休息至少15秒。单次测试时长不超过6秒，取三次测试中的最高值作为受试者的优势手握力量数据。

本研究共纳入4台肺量计：Vitalograph ALPHA肺量计（型号6000，Vitalograph有限公司，爱尔兰）、EasyOne肺量计（型号2001，ndd Medical Technologies公司，瑞士）、CONTEC肺量计（型号SP10，CONTEC医疗系统有限公司，中国）与Microlab肺量计（CareFusion公司，美国加利福尼亚州约巴林达）。每家医疗机构均以Vitalograph-ALPHA肺量计作为参考设备，其余3台肺量计作为本地测试设备。本次评估中每名受试者均使用一次性咬嘴，并严格遵循美国胸科学会（American Thoracic Society, ATS）与欧洲呼吸学会（European Respiratory Society, ERS）的标准化指南。该指南要求受试者取端坐位，夹闭鼻夹，经口快速深吸气后，经咬嘴全力呼气直至肺内气体完全排出。本研究共评估3项肺功能指标：一秒用力呼气容积（FEV1）、用力肺活量（FVC）与峰流速（PEFR）。每项评估共进行3次测试，按照ATS/ERS的重复性与可接受性标准，取三次测试中FEV1、FVC与PEFR的最高值用于后续分析。

数据分析 本研究使用统计产品与服务解决方案（Statistical Product and Service Solutions, SPSS）27.0版本对仪器间信度进行评估，具体方法如下：
1. 配对t检验（符合正态分布的数据）或Wilcoxon符号秩检验（不符合正态分布的数据），以及组内相关系数（Intra-class Correlation Coefficient, ICC）；
2. 测量技术误差（Technical Error of Measurement, TEM）与变异系数（Coefficient of Variability, CV）；
3. Bland-Altman图与一致性界限。

分析完成后，若某台握力计满足以下全部4项标准，则认为其用于测量优势手握力量时具备良好信度：1）均值间无显著性差异；2）组内相关系数（ICC）大于0.90；3）相对测量技术误差与变异系数（原文此处未完整给出）。