Victor E Staartjes1,2,3, Femke Beusekamp4, Marc L Schröder4. 1. Department of Neurosurgery, Bergman Clinics Amsterdam, Rijksweg 69, 1411 GE, Naarden, The Netherlands. victor.staartjes@gmail.com. 2. Department of Neurosurgery, Clinical Neuroscience Center, University Hospital Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. victor.staartjes@gmail.com. 3. Department of Neurosurgery, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. victor.staartjes@gmail.com. 4. Department of Neurosurgery, Bergman Clinics Amsterdam, Rijksweg 69, 1411 GE, Naarden, The Netherlands.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Objective functional tests like the five-repetition sit-to-stand test (5R-STS) can supplement an objective dimension to conventional patient-reported outcome measures. The reliability of unsupervised obtainment of 5R-STS performance is currently unknown. METHODS: We included patients with degenerative pathologies of the lumbar spine. Patients performed the 5R-STS during the initial clinical visit (supervised), as well as at home after instruction by a physiotherapist. At home, patients were first timed by a relative (unsupervised) and subsequently produced a video recording of themselves performing the 5R-STS for digital measurement (telesupervised). Two raters independently assessed the recordings. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-one patients were recruited, of which 100 were eligible. Eighty-eight reported unsupervised results. Sixty-four returned recordings, of which 61 were ratable. Both unsupervised (r: 0.94, 95% CI 0.91-0.96, p < 0.001) and telesupervised (r: 0.90, 95% CI 0.83-0.94, p < 0.001) measurements demonstrated excellent correlation with clinical test times. Patients did not perform more slowly at home (p > 0.05). The interrater agreement for digital judgement of the telesupervised recording was excellent (ICC: 0.996, 95% CI 0.993-0.998, p < 0.001). We confirmed convergent validity with self-reported disability, back pain, and quality of life (all p < 0.05), but not with leg pain (p = 0.189). CONCLUSIONS: Unsupervised at-home assessment using the 5R-STS is highly reliable. There does not appear to be a specific need for patients to return for a supervised 5R-STS follow-up. Rather, instructions can be provided, and the test performed and rated by a partner or family member at home. This is logistically and economically advantageous for patients, clinicians, and researchers. TRIAL REGISTRY NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03321357. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.
PURPOSE: Objective functional tests like the five-repetition sit-to-stand test (5R-STS) can supplement an objective dimension to conventional patient-reported outcome measures. The reliability of unsupervised obtainment of 5R-STS performance is currently unknown. METHODS: We included patients with degenerative pathologies of the lumbar spine. Patients performed the 5R-STS during the initial clinical visit (supervised), as well as at home after instruction by a physiotherapist. At home, patients were first timed by a relative (unsupervised) and subsequently produced a video recording of themselves performing the 5R-STS for digital measurement (telesupervised). Two raters independently assessed the recordings. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-one patients were recruited, of which 100 were eligible. Eighty-eight reported unsupervised results. Sixty-four returned recordings, of which 61 were ratable. Both unsupervised (r: 0.94, 95% CI 0.91-0.96, p < 0.001) and telesupervised (r: 0.90, 95% CI 0.83-0.94, p < 0.001) measurements demonstrated excellent correlation with clinical test times. Patients did not perform more slowly at home (p > 0.05). The interrater agreement for digital judgement of the telesupervised recording was excellent (ICC: 0.996, 95% CI 0.993-0.998, p < 0.001). We confirmed convergent validity with self-reported disability, back pain, and quality of life (all p < 0.05), but not with leg pain (p = 0.189). CONCLUSIONS: Unsupervised at-home assessment using the 5R-STS is highly reliable. There does not appear to be a specific need for patients to return for a supervised 5R-STS follow-up. Rather, instructions can be provided, and the test performed and rated by a partner or family member at home. This is logistically and economically advantageous for patients, clinicians, and researchers. TRIAL REGISTRY NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03321357. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.
Authors: Lidwine B Mokkink; Caroline B Terwee; Donald L Patrick; Jordi Alonso; Paul W Stratford; Dirk L Knol; Lex M Bouter; Henrica C W de Vet Journal: J Clin Epidemiol Date: 2010-07 Impact factor: 6.437
Authors: Raymond W J G Ostelo; Rick A Deyo; P Stratford; Gordon Waddell; Peter Croft; Michael Von Korff; Lex M Bouter; Henrica C de Vet Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2008-01-01 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Sue A Ferguson; William S Marras; Deborah L Burr; Stephen Woods; Ehud Mendel; Purnendu Gupta Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2009-09-01 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Sarah E Jones; Samantha S C Kon; Jane L Canavan; Mehul S Patel; Amy L Clark; Claire M Nolan; Michael I Polkey; William D-C Man Journal: Thorax Date: 2013-06-19 Impact factor: 9.139
Authors: Victor E Staartjes; Holger Joswig; Marco V Corniola; Karl Schaller; Oliver P Gautschi; Martin N Stienen Journal: Global Spine J Date: 2020-12-17