The hip abductor muscles are vitally important for pelvis stability, and common strength deficits can negatively affect functionality. The muscle strength can be measured using different dynamometers and be evaluated in three positions (side-lying, standing, and supine). Obtained strength data can be expressed in different ways, with data normalization providing more objective and comparable results. The aim of this study was to establish the validity and reliability of three protocols in evaluating the isometric strength of the hip abductor muscles. A new functional electromechanical dynamometer assessed strength in three positions, with findings subjected to three data normalization methods. In two identical sessions, the hip abductor strengths of 29 subjects were recorded in the side-lying, standing, and supine positions. Peak force was recorded in absolute terms and normalized against body mass, fat-free mass, and an allometric technique. The peak force recorded in the side-lying position was 30% and 27% higher than in the standing and supine positions, respectively, independent of data normalization methodology. High inter-protocol correlations were found (r: 0.72 to 0.98, p ≤ 0.001). The supine position with allometric data normalization had the highest test-retest reliability (0.94 intraclass correlation coefficient and 5.64% coefficient of variation). In contrast, the side-lying position with body mass data normalization had a 0.66 intraclass correlation coefficient and 9.8% coefficient of variation. In conclusion, the functional electromechanical dynamometer is a valid device for measuring isometric strength in the hip abductor muscles. The three assessed positions are reliable, although the supine position with allometric data normalization provided the best results.

Background Older adults with hip osteoarthritis (OA) suffer a progressive loss of muscle quality and strength, affecting their daily activities and quality of life. The purpose of this study is to compare the levels of isometric strength among older adults with and without hip OA and healthy young adults, and to determine the relationship between muscle quality index (MQI) and isometric strength. Methods Fourteen subjects with hip OA (65.6 ± 3.0 years), 18 healthy older adults (66.6 ± 6.5 years) and 32 young adults (20.7 ± 2.0 years) participated in the study. MQI, isometric muscle strength of the hip, ten time sit-to-stand tests, and body composition were measured. Results The MQI was lower in subjects with hip OA, with no significant differences between groups (p > 0.054). Subjects with OA produced significantly less isometric strength in hip extension (p < 0.001), flexion (p < 0.001), abduction (p < 0.05), adduction (p < 0.001), external (p < 0.05) and internal rotation (p < 0.05). Subjects with OA demonstrated longer time in the execution of the sit-to-stand test (p < 0.001) in comparison with healthy older and young adults. High correlations between MQI, sit-to-stand (r =  − 0.76, p < 0.01) and peak force during hip abduction (r = 0.78, p < 0.01) where found in subjects with OA. Moderate correlation between MQI and peak force during hip flexion (r = 0.55, p < 0.05) and external rotation (r = 0.61, p < 0.05) were found in the OA group. Conclusions Subjects with OA have lower MQI than old and young healthy controls. In subjects with OA, there was a significant relationship between isometric strength of hip muscles and performance on the sit-to-stand test and the MQI.