Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 5, 2026

Method and Instrumented Fixture for Femoral Fracture Testing in a Sideways Fall-on-the-Hip Position
Published on: August 17, 2017
Comparing apples and pears? Evaluating the interchangeability of three different positions for hip abduction and
James O'Brien1, Markus Huthöfer1,2, Emanuel Santner1
1Red Bull Athlete Performance Center, Salzburg Austria.
Abstract:
Objectives: To compare strength parameters and pain ratings across three different positions forisometric hip abduction and adduction strength testing. Design: Cross-sectional study. Setting: Two elite European football academies. Participants: Male football players (n=188, mean age 15.5 ± 1.6) from the U14-U19 teams. Methods: Isometric hip abduction and adduction were tested in 3 different positions on the ForceFrame: bent-leg with knees on pads, straight-leg with ankles on pads, and straight-leg with knees on pads. The order was randomised. The outcome measures were maximum isometric hip adduction and abduction strength (Fmax), limb symmetry index (LSI), hip adduction-to-abduction strength ratio and hip/groin pain numeric rating scale (NRS). Results: Correlation was moderate to high for Fmax in hip adduction (r = 0.64 to 0.73) and abduction (r = 0.78 to 0.84), but low for LSI and strength ratios (r = 0.06 to 0.48). Pain was reported by 19% and 13% of players during adduction and abduction respectively, with the majority (11% and 10%) only reporting pain in one of the three positions. Conclusions: The findings suggest that maximal strength values from the three test positions can be compared (i.e. using a conversion factor). The interchangeability of test positions is otherwise limited, due to inconsistent pain ratings and low correlation for LSI and strength ratios.

