## 4 Discussion
This is closely related to other studies in the Colombian population between the Camry and Jamar instruments [49], MyoGrip and Jamar [50], and K-force and Jamar [21], which have sought to compare the reliability and validity of two dynamometers, including the gold standard. It should be mentioned that, regarding the accuracy of the measurements obtained by the Activ5 for both the right and left hand, we found that the Activ5 underestimated the result provided by the Jamar dynamometer. However, both the Activ5 and the Jamar dynamometer show high reliability in measurements; both ICC and Cronbach's alpha present high scores, indicating that the instruments have good reproducibility in their measurements. For this reason, and considering that both dynamometers compared in this study differ in their precision, structure, ergonomics, weight, and characteristics, it is necessary to develop future research that replicates the validity of the Activ5 dynamometer, as well as future applications in the monitoring of rehabilitation processes and promotion of physical activity, among others. For this reason, future research should carry out investigations using the Activ5 dynamometer in other contexts and ages to favor its reproducibility and to compare the validity according to the results shown by the instrument, the grip structure, and the influence of other protocols different from the one used in the present study. This could have practical utility for both health and sports sciences professionals, primarily for children and elderly populations [51]. However, it is necessary to clarify that in clinical evaluations, the Activ5 dynamometer should be used with caution, considering the estimation reached in the present study and other research suggesting the same with other dynamometers [21]. There is a challenge for health and sports science professionals, which lies in understanding technological advances and putting them at the service of society. There are increasingly more portable instruments with connectivity to mobile devices that provide opportunities to monitor people's recovery, making the rehabilitation process more interactive. This is the case with instruments such as the point of care (POC) in medicine, which can help obtain faster results and help make decisions or develop more efficient therapeutic interventions [52]. All this is because there are smartphone sensors aimed at monitoring and diagnosing health [53], portable devices for balance assessment in stroke patients [54], as well as wireless mobile grip devices that measure both isometric and elastic grip force to assess and help program training [55]. Although there are multiple portable dynamometers available today, determining their interchangeability remains unknown, which can make reading, analyzing, and comparing normative data difficult. In response, the study conducted by [PERSON] [56] sought variability among six dynamometers available on the market to determine the assessment of isometric muscle strength in four muscle groups in healthy individuals. It was proven that the percentage differences between the dynamometers were in the ranges of 0.2% and 16%, concluding that portable dynamometers (Citec, MicroFET2, Jamar Plus, and Baseline Hydraulic) can be used for strength assessment [56]. These findings somewhat relate to those of the present study, which confirmed that the Activ5 dynamometer allows for assessing the isometric strength of the musculature by reporting similar data when compared to the Jamar dynamometer (gold standard). The correlation coefficient to determine the linear relationship between both instruments determined that between the Jamar right-hand dynamometer and the right-hand Activ5, a coefficient R\({}^{2}\) = 0.580, \(p\) = 0.00, was obtained. In contrast, the correlation between the Jamar left-hand dynamometer and left-hand Activ5 had a coefficient R\({}^{2}\) = 0.543, \(p\) = 0.00.