Dynamic Field Assessment of Hip Adductor Function Using a Smartphone-Based Copenhagen Test: Reliability and Concurrent Associations with Isometric Strength in Amateur Football Players

Assessing hip adductor muscle strength is important for identifying weakness or side-to-side imbalances associated with groin injury risk. Although the Copenhagen adductor exercise is widely used to evaluate adductor function, the quantification of strength-related outcomes using inertial sensors integrated in smartphones during this task has not been systematically examined. This study aimed to evaluate the reliability of a smartphone-based Copenhagen adductor field test and its associations with established isometric hip adductor strength assessments. Twenty amateur male football players (21.1 ± 3.2 years) completed two laboratory sessions separated by one week. The reliability of the smartphone-based Copenhagen test was assessed for endurance-related outcome (repetition count) and strength-related outcomes (mean repetition time and peak velocity) using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM), and minimum detectable change (MDC). Participants also performed unilateral and bilateral isometric hip adductor tests using load cells to obtain isometric peak force (IPF) and rate of force development at 150 ms (RFD150). Associations were examined using Pearson correlation coefficients. The smartphone-based Copenhagen test showed ICC point estimates ranging from 0.63 to 0.83, although several 95% confidence intervals were relatively wide (ICC = 0.63–0.83; SEM = 6.7–18.5%). Endurance-related outcomes were not significantly associated with IPF or RFD150. In contrast, peak velocity showed low-to-moderate correlations with RFD150 (r = 0.48–0.63) and moderate correlations with IPF (r = 0.50–0.64; p < 0.05). These findings suggest that the peak velocity obtained during the Copenhagen adductor test may provide a practical field-based complement to conventional isometric assessments. However, given the moderate strength of the observed associations and the measurement error of peak velocity, these outcomes should be interpreted with caution and warrant further investigation.