BACKGROUND: Performance-based and self-report instruments of physical function are frequently used and provide complementary information. Identifying older adults with a mismatch between actual and perceived function has utility in clinical settings and in the design of interventions. Using novel, video-animated technology, the objective of this study was to develop a self-report measure that parallels the domains of objective physical function assessed by the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB)-the virtual SPPB (vSPPB). METHODS: The SPPB, vSPPB, the self-report Pepper Assessment Tool for Disability, the Mobility Assessment Tool-short form, and a 400-m walk test were administered to 110 older adults (mean age = 80.6±5.2 years). One-week test-retest reliability of the vSPPB was examined in 30 participants. RESULTS: The total SPPB (mean [±SD] = 7.7±2.8) and vSPPB (7.7±3.2) scores were virtually identical, yet moderately correlated (r = .601, p < .05). The component scores of the SPPB and vSPPB were also moderately correlated (all p values <.01). The vSPPB (intraclass correlation = .963, p < .05) was reliable; however, individuals with the lowest function overestimated their overall lower extremity function while participants of all functional levels overestimated their ability on chair stands, but accurately perceived their usual gait speed. CONCLUSION: In spite of the similarity between the SPPB and vSPPB, the moderate strength of the association between the two suggests that they offer unique perspectives on an older adult's physical function.
BACKGROUND: Performance-based and self-report instruments of physical function are frequently used and provide complementary information. Identifying older adults with a mismatch between actual and perceived function has utility in clinical settings and in the design of interventions. Using novel, video-animated technology, the objective of this study was to develop a self-report measure that parallels the domains of objective physical function assessed by the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB)-the virtual SPPB (vSPPB). METHODS: The SPPB, vSPPB, the self-report Pepper Assessment Tool for Disability, the Mobility Assessment Tool-short form, and a 400-m walk test were administered to 110 older adults (mean age = 80.6±5.2 years). One-week test-retest reliability of the vSPPB was examined in 30 participants. RESULTS: The total SPPB (mean [±SD] = 7.7±2.8) and vSPPB (7.7±3.2) scores were virtually identical, yet moderately correlated (r = .601, p < .05). The component scores of the SPPB and vSPPB were also moderately correlated (all p values <.01). The vSPPB (intraclass correlation = .963, p < .05) was reliable; however, individuals with the lowest function overestimated their overall lower extremity function while participants of all functional levels overestimated their ability on chair stands, but accurately perceived their usual gait speed. CONCLUSION: In spite of the similarity between the SPPB and vSPPB, the moderate strength of the association between the two suggests that they offer unique perspectives on an older adult's physical function.
Authors: Marco Pahor; Steven N Blair; Mark Espeland; Roger Fielding; Thomas M Gill; Jack M Guralnik; Evan C Hadley; Abby C King; Stephen B Kritchevsky; Cinzia Maraldi; Michael E Miller; Anne B Newman; Walter J Rejeski; Sergei Romashkan; Stephanie Studenski Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2006-11 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: W Jack Rejeski; Anthony P Marsh; Elizabeth Chmelo; Abbie J Prescott; Meredith Dobrosielski; Michael P Walkup; Mark Espeland; Michael E Miller; Stephen Kritchevsky Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2009-01-30 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: W Jack Rejeski; Edward H Ip; Anthony P Marsh; Michael E Miller; Deborah F Farmer Journal: Geriatr Gerontol Int Date: 2008-03 Impact factor: 2.730
Authors: C F Mendes de Leon; T E Seeman; D I Baker; E D Richardson; M E Tinetti Journal: J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci Date: 1996-07 Impact factor: 4.077
Authors: David B Reuben; Teresa E Seeman; Emmett Keeler; Risa P Hayes; Lee Bowman; Ase Sewall; Susan H Hirsch; Robert B Wallace; Jack M Guralnik Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2004-10 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Edward McAuley; Katherine S Morris; Shawna E Doerksen; Robert W Motl; Hu Liang; Siobhan M White; Thomas R Wójcicki; Karl Rosengren Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2007-12 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: S Yilmaz; M C Janelsins; M Flannery; E Culakova; M Wells; P-J Lin; K P Loh; R Epstein; C Kamen; A S Kleckner; S A Norton; S Plumb; S Alberti; K Doyle; M Porto; M Weber; N Dukelow; A Magnuson; L A Kehoe; G Nightingale; M Jensen-Battaglia; K M Mustian; S G Mohile Journal: J Geriatr Oncol Date: 2022-03-12 Impact factor: 3.929
Authors: Megan Heffernan; Gavin Andrews; Maria A Fiatarone Singh; Michael Valenzuela; Kaarin J Anstey; Anthony J Maeder; John McNeil; Louisa Jorm; Nicola T Lautenschlager; Perminder S Sachdev; Jeewani A Ginige; Megan J Hobbs; Christos Boulamatsis; Tiffany Chau; Lynne Cobiac; Kay L Cox; Kenneth Daniel; Victoria M Flood; Yareni Guerrero; Jane Gunn; Nidhi Jain; Nicole A Kochan; Amit Lampit; Yorgi Mavros; Jacinda Meiklejohn; Yian Noble; Fiona O'Leary; Sue Radd-Vagenas; Courtney C Walton; Henry Brodaty Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2019 Impact factor: 4.472
Authors: Robert W Motl; Yvonne C Learmonth; Thomas R Wójcicki; Jason Fanning; Elizabeth A Hubbard; Dominique Kinnett-Hopkins; Sarah A Roberts; Edward McAuley Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2015-12-03 Impact factor: 3.921
Authors: Kah Poh Loh; Chandrika Sanapala; Erin Elizabeth Watson; Marielle Jensen-Battaglia; Michelle C Janelsins; Heidi D Klepin; Rebecca Schnall; Eva Culakova; Paula Vertino; Martha Susiarjo; Po-Ju Lin; Jason H Mendler; Jane L Liesveld; Eric J Huselton; Kathryn Taberner; Supriya G Mohile; Karen Mustian Journal: Blood Adv Date: 2022-07-12