OBJECTIVE: To determine the test-retest reliability of the 6-minute walk test in people with fibromyalgia. METHODS: Twenty-six subjects (27-59 years of age) performed 3 walk tests over consecutive days before and after a 4-week treatment program. Reliability was determined using a one-way repeated measures analysis of variance and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC2,1). RESULTS: Reliability of the 6-minute walk test was excellent both at program intake (ICC2,1 = 0.91) and program completion (ICC2,1 = 0.98). On program intake, significant differences (P < 0.01) were found between test 1 (478 +/- 61 m) and test 2 (492 +/- 57 m), and between test 1 and test 3 (495 +/- 60 m). On program completion, there were no significant differences across the 3 replicate tests (507 m, 505 m, and 509 m). CONCLUSIONS: The 6-minute walk test is a reliable measure in people with fibromyalgia. In this study, two trials were required to achieve a stable walk performance before a treatment program. This learning effect was not present following the intervention.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the test-retest reliability of the 6-minute walk test in people with fibromyalgia. METHODS: Twenty-six subjects (27-59 years of age) performed 3 walk tests over consecutive days before and after a 4-week treatment program. Reliability was determined using a one-way repeated measures analysis of variance and the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC2,1). RESULTS: Reliability of the 6-minute walk test was excellent both at program intake (ICC2,1 = 0.91) and program completion (ICC2,1 = 0.98). On program intake, significant differences (P < 0.01) were found between test 1 (478 +/- 61 m) and test 2 (492 +/- 57 m), and between test 1 and test 3 (495 +/- 60 m). On program completion, there were no significant differences across the 3 replicate tests (507 m, 505 m, and 509 m). CONCLUSIONS: The 6-minute walk test is a reliable measure in people with fibromyalgia. In this study, two trials were required to achieve a stable walk performance before a treatment program. This learning effect was not present following the intervention.
Authors: Stephen J Bartels; Sarah I Pratt; Kelly A Aschbrenner; Laura K Barre; John A Naslund; Rosemarie Wolfe; Haiyi Xie; Gregory J McHugo; Daniel E Jimenez; Ken Jue; James Feldman; Bruce L Bird Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2014-12-12 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: Sara Wilcox; Bruce McClenaghan; Patricia A Sharpe; Meghan Baruth; Jennifer M Hootman; Katherine Leith; Marsha Dowda Journal: Am J Prev Med Date: 2014-11-06 Impact factor: 5.043
Authors: V A Aparicio; V Segura-Jiménez; I C Alvarez-Gallardo; F Estévez-López; D Camiletti-Moirón; P A Latorre; M Delgado-Fernández; A Carbonell-Baeza Journal: Rheumatol Int Date: 2013-12-10 Impact factor: 2.631
Authors: Stephen J Bartels; Sarah I Pratt; Kelly A Aschbrenner; Laura K Barre; Kenneth Jue; Rosemarie S Wolfe; Haiyi Xie; Gregory McHugo; Meghan Santos; Gail E Williams; John A Naslund; Kim T Mueser Journal: Psychiatr Serv Date: 2013-08-01 Impact factor: 3.084
Authors: Patricia A Sharpe; Sara Wilcox; Danielle E Schoffman; Brent Hutto; Andrew Ortaglia Journal: Disabil Health J Date: 2015-06-27 Impact factor: 2.554
Authors: Divay Chandra; Robert A Wise; Hrishikesh S Kulkarni; Roberto P Benzo; Gerard Criner; Barry Make; William A Slivka; Andrew L Ries; John J Reilly; Fernando J Martinez; Frank C Sciurba Journal: Chest Date: 2012-12 Impact factor: 9.410