The Hip Bridge Test assesses hip extension endurance, posterior-chain capacity and pelvic control using double-leg or single-leg bridge positions. The single-leg version has stronger research support than the double-leg version because recent work has examined single-leg bridge endurance values, clinician assessment accuracy and gluteal endurance validity. A 2026 study reported preliminary normative single-leg bridge endurance values of approximately 65.2 seconds for the dominant leg and 63.9 seconds for the non-dominant leg in asymptomatic young adults, while earlier gluteal endurance research reported a mean bridging endurance hold time of 81.03 ± 24.79 seconds for the GEM-B bridging endurance measure.
The hip bridge is a simple and practical field assessment that can be used to monitor hip extension endurance, posterior-chain endurance and pelvic control. It is commonly used in fitness, sport, rehabilitation-adjacent exercise settings and performance monitoring because it is easy to set up, requires minimal equipment and can be repeated over time.
The double-leg version is less demanding and may be useful as an entry-level bridge endurance test. The single-leg version is more challenging and provides better side-to-side comparison.
The result should not be interpreted as an isolated glute strength score. Research indicates that bridging tasks can involve the gluteals, hamstrings, trunk muscles and lower-limb stabilisers, and the exact contribution depends on body position and protocol. Lehecka and colleagues reported that gluteal endurance measures, including a bridging endurance measure, demonstrated strong reliability and validity, but the same paper also noted that unilateral bridge positions can involve substantial hamstring activity depending on setup.
Test name: Hip Bridge Test
Versions: Double-leg hip bridge, single-leg hip bridge
Category: Hip extension endurance / posterior-chain endurance / pelvic control
Primary score: Time held in seconds or repetitions completed
Best use: Baseline testing, side-to-side comparison, retesting and progress tracking
Key limitation: Published norms are stronger for single-leg bridge endurance than for double-leg bridge endurance, and results are highly protocol dependent.
The Hip Bridge Test requires the client to lift and maintain the pelvis in a bridge position. In the double-leg version, both feet remain on the ground. In the single-leg version, one leg supports the bridge while the other leg is lifted.
The test may be scored as:
Timed hold: how long the bridge position can be maintained
Repetition test: how many valid bridge repetitions can be completed
Timed repetition test: repetitions completed in a fixed time period
For Measurz article consistency, the preferred protocol should be clearly defined because timed holds and repetition tests should not be compared directly.
The Hip Bridge Test may be used to assess:
Hip extension endurance
Gluteal endurance contribution
Posterior-chain endurance
Pelvic control
Trunk and lumbopelvic stability
Side-to-side differences in the single-leg version
Baseline and retest change
Progress after endurance or strength training blocks
It is most useful when combined with related findings such as hip range of motion, lower-limb strength, balance, hamstring bridge testing, hop testing and symptoms.
The primary score is:
Time held in seconds or valid repetitions completed, depending on the chosen protocol.
The result may reflect:
Gluteus maximus endurance
Gluteus medius contribution
Hamstring contribution
Trunk and pelvic control
Hip extension tolerance
Body mass influence
Pain or symptom response
Familiarisation and motivation
Ability to maintain hip height and pelvic alignment
It does not directly isolate maximal glute strength, hamstring strength or trunk strength. It is better described as a functional posterior-chain endurance and pelvic control assessment.
The Hip Bridge Test may be useful for:
General fitness clients
Runners
Field and court sport clients
Gym and strength-training clients
Clients completing posterior-chain endurance monitoring
Professionals wanting a low-equipment baseline test
Professionals tracking side-to-side differences using a single-leg version
It may not be appropriate if the client cannot tolerate the bridge position, experiences cramping immediately, or cannot maintain a safe testing position.
Mat or flat testing surface
Stopwatch or Measurz stopwatch
Optional Measurz rep counter for repetition-based versions
Optional Measurz metronome for cadence-controlled bridge repetitions
Optional Measurz AR measurement to record foot distance, knee angle or setup position
Optional inclinometer to monitor pelvic or trunk position
Optional MAT isometric tools, including Anker, Gripper or Muscle Meter, for related hip extension, knee flexion or lower-limb isometric strength testing
Measurz platform for recording version, time, reps, side, symptoms, compensations and retest comparison
The Measurz stopwatch is useful for timed holds, while the rep counter and metronome can support repetition-based bridge testing. AR measurement can help document foot position or setup distance so the test is repeated consistently. For a broader profile, MAT isometric tools can be used for related objective strength testing.
The client lies supine with knees bent and feet flat on the floor.
Foot position is standardised and recorded.
Arms remain relaxed or crossed, but the same position should be used on retest.
The client lifts the hips until the trunk and thighs form a consistent bridge line.
Start timing once the correct bridge position is achieved.
Stop timing when the client drops below the target hip height, changes foot position, reports intolerable symptoms, cramps significantly or chooses to stop.
Record time in seconds and the reason for stopping.
The client starts in a double-leg bridge setup.
One leg is lifted according to the chosen protocol.
The pelvis remains level.
Start timing once the unsupported leg is lifted and the pelvis is aligned.
Stop timing when the pelvis drops, rotates, the lifted leg touches down, symptoms become unacceptable or the client chooses to stop.
Test both sides with consistent rest.
Record time for each side separately.
If using repetitions:
Select double-leg or single-leg.
Define top and bottom positions.
Use a metronome if standardising tempo.
Count only valid repetitions.
Stop when range, alignment, cadence or control fails.
Record:
Version: double-leg or single-leg
Score type: timed hold, repetitions or timed repetitions
Time held or repetitions completed
Side tested for single-leg version
Dominant and non-dominant side
Hip height quality
Pelvic rotation or drop
Cramping
Pain or symptoms
Reason for stopping
Retest conditions
A higher score generally suggests better bridge endurance, but interpretation should account for setup, knee angle, foot position, hip height, cadence, symptoms and fatigue.
The strongest current evidence is for the single-leg bridge. Worst and Henderson reported preliminary normative single-leg bridge endurance values of 65.2 seconds for the dominant leg and 63.9 seconds for the non-dominant leg in 77 asymptomatic participants with a mean age of 20.3 years. They also found strong correlations between clinician visual assessment and app-based angle detection for determining form loss.
Lehecka and colleagues reported mean hold times of 81.03 ± 24.79 seconds for the GEM-B bridging endurance measure and found high intra-rater reliability, high inter-rater reliability and EMG-based evidence of gluteal fatigue during the task.
A later 2026 correspondence clarified that the 2026 single-leg bridge normative study was not the first to provide relevant normative values, because the GEM-B bridging endurance measure had already provided foundational data in 2021. This matters because future Measurz content should acknowledge both lines of evidence rather than overstating novelty.
Use these as broad field-use ranges only:
Strong endurance: 80 seconds or more
Good: 60–79 seconds
Moderate: 40–59 seconds
Developing: 20–39 seconds
Low current endurance profile: under 20 seconds
These values should be interpreted against the exact protocol, age, training background, symptoms and side-to-side comparison.
Formal published norms for the exact double-leg bridge hold are limited. Use practical internal benchmarking:
Strong: 120 seconds or more
Good: 90–119 seconds
Moderate: 60–89 seconds
Developing: 30–59 seconds
Low current endurance profile: under 30 seconds
These are practical comparison bands, not formal norms.
The evidence base is strongest for single-leg bridge-type endurance testing. The GEM study found high intra-rater reliability, high inter-rater reliability and EMG-based validation of gluteal fatigue for gluteal endurance measures, including GEM-B bridging endurance.
The 2026 single-leg bridge study reported strong agreement between clinician visual assessment and app-based detection of form loss, supporting the practical use of clinician-observed test termination when standardised criteria are used.
However, bridge tests should not be overinterpreted as isolated glute tests. The same evidence base highlights that hip bridge tasks can involve multiple muscle groups, and unilateral bridge positions may involve substantial hamstring contribution depending on knee angle and setup.
Common errors include:
Changing foot distance between tests
Allowing hip height to drop without stopping the test
Not recording knee angle
Not recording whether the test was double-leg or single-leg
Not recording cramping
Comparing hold tests with repetition tests
Allowing pelvic rotation during single-leg testing
Using inconsistent tempo for repetition tests
Interpreting the score as isolated glute strength
The Hip Bridge Test can help professionals:
Monitor hip extension endurance
Compare single-leg side-to-side endurance
Track baseline and retest change
Observe pelvic control under fatigue
Combine endurance findings with hip ROM, hamstring bridge testing, calf raise endurance, sit-to-stand tests and isometric strength measures
Educate clients using a simple, repeatable performance measure
Record:
Test name: Hip Bridge Test
Version: double-leg or single-leg
Score type: hold, repetitions or timed repetitions
Time or reps
Side tested
Dominance
Foot position
Knee angle
Hip height target
Pain score
Cramping
Symptoms
Pelvic drop or rotation
Reason for stopping
Retest date
Related lower-limb strength, ROM and endurance tests
The Measurz stopwatch, rep counter and metronome can support consistent timing, counting and tempo. AR measurement can help document setup position, and MAT tools such as Anker, Gripper and Muscle Meter can be used for related strength testing. This test can sit within a wider Measurz profile that includes orthopaedic tests, ROM, outcome measures, strength tests and endurance tests.
It measures hip extension endurance, posterior-chain endurance and pelvic control. It does not isolate one muscle.
It can involve both. Some evidence supports bridge endurance as a gluteal endurance measure, while other work shows that hamstring contribution can be substantial depending on setup.
A hold of approximately 60–80 seconds may suggest good endurance in young active adults, but exact interpretation depends on protocol and population.
No. They should be recorded as separate tests.
No. It can support assessment and monitoring but should not be used as a standalone diagnostic tool.
The Hip Bridge Test is best described as a posterior-chain endurance and pelvic control assessment.
Single-leg bridge endurance has stronger published evidence than double-leg bridge endurance.
Current research supports using single-leg bridge values around 60–80 seconds as practical young-adult context.
The test should not be described as isolated glute strength or isolated hamstring strength.
Measurz can track setup, time, reps, symptoms, compensations and progress over time.
Lehecka, B. J. (2026). Clarifying scientific priority and existing normative values for single-leg bridge endurance. International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy, 21(3), 223–225. doi: 10.26603/001c.157580.
Lehecka, B. J., Smith, B. S., Rundell, T., Cappaert, T. A., & Hakansson, N. A. (2021). The reliability and validity of gluteal endurance measures (GEMs). International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy, 16(6), 1475–1488. doi: 10.26603/001c.29592.
Worst, H., & Henderson, N. (2026). Establishing normative values and clinician assessment accuracy for the single leg bridge endurance test. International Journal of Sports Physical Therapy, 21(1), 34–40. doi: 10.26603/001c.154592.
