Allon Goldberg1, Martina Chavis, Johnny Watkins, Tyler Wilson. 1. Department of Health Care Sciences, Physical Therapy Program, Mobility Research Laboratory, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI 48201, USA. agoldberg@wayne.edu
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The five-times-sit-to-stand test (FTSST) is a physical performance test commonly-used in clinical geriatric studies. The relationship between FTSST times and dynamic balance has not been widely investigated in older adults. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the validity of the FTSST as a measure of dynamic balance in older adults. A second objective was to quantify relative and absolute reliability, as well as minimum detectable change (MDC) of the FTSST in older adults. METHODS: Twenty-nine females (mean age, 73.6 years) performed two trials of the FTSST, timed up and go (TUG), and functional reach (FR) tests. Validity of the FTSST as a measure of dynamic balance was evaluated by quantifying strength of relationships between the FTSST and two measures of dynamic balance, TUG and FR, using Pearson's correlation coefficient. Measures of relative [intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC)] and absolute [standard error of measurement (SEM)] reliability, as well as the MDC at the 95% confidence level (MDC 95 ) were computed for the FTSST. RESULTS: The Pearson's correlation coefficient between FTSST and TUG (r=0.64, p<0.001) indicates that FTSST is a valid measure of dynamic balance and functional mobility in older adults. The ICC 2,1 of 0.95 is indicative of excellent relative reliability of the FTSST. SEM was 0.9 seconds and MDC 95 was 2.5 seconds for the FTSST. SEM (6.3% of mean FTSST) and MDC (17.5% of mean FTSST) percent values were low. CONCLUSIONS: The FTSST is a valid measure of dynamic balance and functional mobility in older adults. The high ICC and low SEM and SEM% suggest excellent relative and absolute reliability and reproducibility of the FTSST in older adults. Change in FTSST performance should exceed 2.5 seconds to be considered real change beyond measurement error.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The five-times-sit-to-stand test (FTSST) is a physical performance test commonly-used in clinical geriatric studies. The relationship between FTSST times and dynamic balance has not been widely investigated in older adults. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the validity of the FTSST as a measure of dynamic balance in older adults. A second objective was to quantify relative and absolute reliability, as well as minimum detectable change (MDC) of the FTSST in older adults. METHODS: Twenty-nine females (mean age, 73.6 years) performed two trials of the FTSST, timed up and go (TUG), and functional reach (FR) tests. Validity of the FTSST as a measure of dynamic balance was evaluated by quantifying strength of relationships between the FTSST and two measures of dynamic balance, TUG and FR, using Pearson's correlation coefficient. Measures of relative [intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC)] and absolute [standard error of measurement (SEM)] reliability, as well as the MDC at the 95% confidence level (MDC 95 ) were computed for the FTSST. RESULTS: The Pearson's correlation coefficient between FTSST and TUG (r=0.64, p<0.001) indicates that FTSST is a valid measure of dynamic balance and functional mobility in older adults. The ICC 2,1 of 0.95 is indicative of excellent relative reliability of the FTSST. SEM was 0.9 seconds and MDC 95 was 2.5 seconds for the FTSST. SEM (6.3% of mean FTSST) and MDC (17.5% of mean FTSST) percent values were low. CONCLUSIONS: The FTSST is a valid measure of dynamic balance and functional mobility in older adults. The high ICC and low SEM and SEM% suggest excellent relative and absolute reliability and reproducibility of the FTSST in older adults. Change in FTSST performance should exceed 2.5 seconds to be considered real change beyond measurement error.
Authors: J Matt McCrary; David Goldstein; Carolina X Sandler; Benjamin K Barry; Michael Marthick; Hannah C Timmins; Tiffany Li; Lisa Horvath; Peter Grimison; Susanna B Park Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2019-02-12 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Cory L Christiansen; Michael J Bade; Bradley S Davidson; Michael R Dayton; Jennifer E Stevens-Lapsley Journal: J Orthop Sports Phys Ther Date: 2015-07-24 Impact factor: 4.751
Authors: Dana L Judd; Douglas A Dennis; Abbey C Thomas; Pamela Wolfe; Michael R Dayton; Jennifer E Stevens-Lapsley Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2014-02 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Jenna C Gibbs; Caitlin McArthur; John D Wark; Lehana Thabane; Samuel C Scherer; Sadhana Prasad; Alexandra Papaioannou; Nicole Mittmann; Judi Laprade; Sandra Kim; Aliya Khan; David L Kendler; Keith D Hill; Angela M Cheung; Robert Bleakney; Maureen C Ashe; Jonathan D Adachi; Lora M Giangregorio Journal: Phys Ther Date: 2020-04-17
Authors: Caroline Gil de Godoy; Erika Christina Gouveia E Silva; Danielle Brancolini de Oliveira; Amislaine Cristina Gambeta; Elizabeth Mendes da Silva; Camila Machado de Campos; Ana Carolina Basso Schmitt; Celso R F Carvalho; Carolina Fu; Clarice Tanaka; Naomi Kondo Nakagawa; Carlos Toufen Junior; Carlos Roberto Ribeiro de Carvalho; Keith Hill; José Eduardo Pompeu Journal: Clinics (Sao Paulo) Date: 2021-06-14 Impact factor: 2.365