Elsevier

Journal of Hand Therapy

Volume 13, Issue 3, July–September 2000, Pages 203-210
Journal of Hand Therapy

The use of the rapid exchange grip test in detecting sincerity of effort, part II: Validity of the test

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0894-1130(00)80003-4Get rights and content

Abstract

The rapid exchange grip (REG) test was developed to identify patients exerting insincere effort. The premise of the REG test is that a maximal, sincere effort yields a “negative REG,” in which peak static grip (SG) scores are greater than peak REG scores, and that a submaximal, insincere effort yields a “positive REG,” in which REG scores are greater than SG scores. There is disagreement in the literature concerning what constitutes a positive REG test, suggesting that the REG may not be a valid measure of sincerity of effort. The purpose of the present study was to investigate the validity of the REG test by examining its premise as well as its sensitivity and specificity values. The 146 uninjured subjects performed a series of randomized grip strength tests, exerting both maximal and submaximal efforts. The tests included the REG at hand switch rates of 45 rpm (REG-45) and 60 rpm (REG-60), the maximal static grip test (MSGT), and the five-rung test (5R). Our findings supported the concept of a “negative REG” for both REG maneuvers and both comparative SG tests. The concept of a “positive REG,” however, was supported only when peak REG scores were compared with peak 5R scores. The authors found relatively low sensitivity and specificity values, suggesting that the REG test may not be sensitive or specific enough to effectively detect sincerity of effort. The authors discuss the likelihood that mistakes will be made when the REG test is used to diagnose sincerity of effort and the possible consequences of making such mistakes.

References (25)

  • JC Gilbert et al.

    Simple method to determine sincerity of effort during a maximal isometric test of grip strength

    Am J Phys Med

    (1983)
  • KHE Kroemer et al.

    Towards an objective assessment of the “maximal voluntary contraction” component in routine muscle strength measurements

    Europ J Appl Physiol

    (1980)
  • Cited by (33)

    • Evaluation of the Hand and Upper Extremity

      2020, Cooper's Fundamentals of Hand Therapy: Clinical Reasoning and Treatment Guidelines for Common Diagnoses of the Upper Extremity
    • Evaluation of the Hand and Upper Extremity

      2013, Fundamentals of Hand Therapy: Clinical Reasoning and Treatment Guidelines for Common Diagnoses of the Upper Extremity: Second Edition
    • Identifying sincerity of effort based on the combined predictive ability of multiple grip strength tests

      2012, Journal of Hand Therapy
      Citation Excerpt :

      In contrast, King and Berryhill3 found that the probability of passing four of five tests was associated with a sensitivity of 0.93 and specificity of 0.86. The 42% error rate is only slightly better than the error rates reported when using the CV, 5R, or REG alone, which range from 47% to 69%.21,33,45 In addition, the area under the ROC curve of the full logit model was 86.5%, a value indicating only fair discriminability,57 which is the test's ability to discriminate between sincere and insincere efforts.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text