OBJECTIVE: To determine the test-retest reliability of the Sensory Organization Test (SOT) in older persons with a unilateral transtibial amputation. DESIGN: Cross-sectional observational study with repeated measures. SETTING: A University balance laboratory. PARTICIPANTS: Fifteen participants (12 men and 3 women) who had undergone a unilateral transtibial amputation that was performed as a result of either trauma or complications of diabetes or peripheral vascular disease were recruited from a patient database. The mean age of the participants was 69.53 years (SD, 6.60), with 11.94 mean years of prosthetic use. INTERVENTION: All participants completed 3 trials of the 6 balance testing conditions in the standard SOT protocol with use of the NeuroCom SMART Equitest system on 2 occasions approximately 2 weeks apart. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Reliability of the mean equilibrium and strategy scores for the 6 SOT conditions and the overall composite score was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficients. RESULTS: The test-retest reliability coefficients (intraclass correlation coefficient model 2,1) for the equilibrium scores ranged from 0.67-0.90 for conditions 1 to 4 and 6, indicating fair-to-good reliability. The coefficients obtained for the strategy scores of all the conditions and the composite score showed excellent reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients >0.75). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that the majority of outcome measurements associated with the SOT protocol on the SMART Equitest provide a reliable measure of dynamic balance performance in older persons with a unilateral transtibial amputation, even in the presence of comorbidities. The equilibrium, strategy, and composite scores obtained from the testing protocol with the exception of condition 5, can be used reliably in clinical practice to monitor for changes in balance with rehabilitation or to monitor the effects of a specific intervention and/or in patients with comorbidities that could potentially affect their balance capacities.
OBJECTIVE: To determine the test-retest reliability of the Sensory Organization Test (SOT) in older persons with a unilateral transtibial amputation. DESIGN: Cross-sectional observational study with repeated measures. SETTING: A University balance laboratory. PARTICIPANTS: Fifteen participants (12 men and 3 women) who had undergone a unilateral transtibial amputation that was performed as a result of either trauma or complications of diabetes or peripheral vascular disease were recruited from a patient database. The mean age of the participants was 69.53 years (SD, 6.60), with 11.94 mean years of prosthetic use. INTERVENTION: All participants completed 3 trials of the 6 balance testing conditions in the standard SOT protocol with use of the NeuroCom SMART Equitest system on 2 occasions approximately 2 weeks apart. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Reliability of the mean equilibrium and strategy scores for the 6 SOT conditions and the overall composite score was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficients. RESULTS: The test-retest reliability coefficients (intraclass correlation coefficient model 2,1) for the equilibrium scores ranged from 0.67-0.90 for conditions 1 to 4 and 6, indicating fair-to-good reliability. The coefficients obtained for the strategy scores of all the conditions and the composite score showed excellent reliability (intraclass correlation coefficients >0.75). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that the majority of outcome measurements associated with the SOT protocol on the SMART Equitest provide a reliable measure of dynamic balance performance in older persons with a unilateral transtibial amputation, even in the presence of comorbidities. The equilibrium, strategy, and composite scores obtained from the testing protocol with the exception of condition 5, can be used reliably in clinical practice to monitor for changes in balance with rehabilitation or to monitor the effects of a specific intervention and/or in patients with comorbidities that could potentially affect their balance capacities.
Authors: Nuria Sarroca; María José Luesma; José Valero; María Pilar Del Caso; Cristina Alonso; Jorge Calleja; Tania Lorenzo; Javier Bayod; Manuel Lahoz Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2022-05-12 Impact factor: 4.996
Authors: Sara R Koehler-McNicholas; Billie C Savvas Slater; Karl Koester; Eric A Nickel; John E Ferguson; Andrew H Hansen Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-09-26 Impact factor: 3.240