Roberta Forte1,2, Giuseppe De Vito3,4, Colin A G Boreham3. 1. Department of Human Movement and Sports Sciences, University of Rome Foro Italico, Piazza Lauro de Bosis 15, 00135, Rome, Italy. roberta.forte@uniroma4.it. 2. Institute for Sport and Health, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland. roberta.forte@uniroma4.it. 3. Institute for Sport and Health, University College Dublin, Belfield, Dublin 4, Ireland. 4. Department of Biomedical Sciences, University of Padova, Padua, Italy.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of reliability data for walking speed tests in complex conditions to assess functioning in healthy older individuals. AIMS: To evaluate the absolute intra- and intertest reliability of walking speed performed in basic and complex conditions in healthy older individuals. METHODS: Fifty-two men and women of mean age 69.7 ± 3.2 years were tested for habitual and maximal walking speed. Maximal speed was also assessed under different conditions, including walking on a path of reduced width; picking up objects; stepping over hurdles; stepping over hurdles wearing sunglasses and finally, carrying a box. Two testing sessions (separated by 4 weeks) of two trials each were administered. Reliability was analysed by intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), minimal detectable change (MDC) and Bland-Altman plots with limits of agreement (LOA). RESULTS: Intrasession ICCs ranged from good to excellent (0.89-0.95) except for picking up objects (0.44). Intersession ICCs were moderate to good (0.60-0.78) and %MDCs were acceptable (14-24%). Bland-Altman plots suggested a good agreement between the two testing sessions at group level (mean differences from - 0.02 to - 0.11 m/s), and limited agreement between testing sessions at individual level (upper LOA from 0.13 to 0.37 m/s and lower LOA from - 0.29 to - 0.49 m/s). CONCLUSIONS: Complex walking speed tests are generally reliable measures displaying good and moderate intra- and inter-session reliability. Such tests seem a more suitable functional assessment tool for heathy older subjects compared with simple walking. Some learning effect may be present and further reliability studies are needed.
BACKGROUND: There is a paucity of reliability data for walking speed tests in complex conditions to assess functioning in healthy older individuals. AIMS: To evaluate the absolute intra- and intertest reliability of walking speed performed in basic and complex conditions in healthy older individuals. METHODS: Fifty-two men and women of mean age 69.7 ± 3.2 years were tested for habitual and maximal walking speed. Maximal speed was also assessed under different conditions, including walking on a path of reduced width; picking up objects; stepping over hurdles; stepping over hurdles wearing sunglasses and finally, carrying a box. Two testing sessions (separated by 4 weeks) of two trials each were administered. Reliability was analysed by intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), minimal detectable change (MDC) and Bland-Altman plots with limits of agreement (LOA). RESULTS: Intrasession ICCs ranged from good to excellent (0.89-0.95) except for picking up objects (0.44). Intersession ICCs were moderate to good (0.60-0.78) and %MDCs were acceptable (14-24%). Bland-Altman plots suggested a good agreement between the two testing sessions at group level (mean differences from - 0.02 to - 0.11 m/s), and limited agreement between testing sessions at individual level (upper LOA from 0.13 to 0.37 m/s and lower LOA from - 0.29 to - 0.49 m/s). CONCLUSIONS: Complex walking speed tests are generally reliable measures displaying good and moderate intra- and inter-session reliability. Such tests seem a more suitable functional assessment tool for heathy older subjects compared with simple walking. Some learning effect may be present and further reliability studies are needed.
Authors: John H Hollman; Katherine B Childs; Megan L McNeil; Amy C Mueller; Christopher M Quilter; James W Youdas Journal: Gait Posture Date: 2010-04-02 Impact factor: 2.840
Authors: Stephanie Studenski; Subashan Perera; Kushang Patel; Caterina Rosano; Kimberly Faulkner; Marco Inzitari; Jennifer Brach; Julie Chandler; Peggy Cawthon; Elizabeth Barrett Connor; Michael Nevitt; Marjolein Visser; Stephen Kritchevsky; Stefania Badinelli; Tamara Harris; Anne B Newman; Jane Cauley; Luigi Ferrucci; Jack Guralnik Journal: JAMA Date: 2011-01-05 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Massimiliano Ditroilo; Roberta Forte; David McKeown; Colin Boreham; Giuseppe De Vito Journal: J Sports Sci Date: 2011-11-18 Impact factor: 3.337
Authors: Aileen P McGinn; Robert C Kaplan; Joe Verghese; Daniel M Rosenbaum; Bruce M Psaty; Alison E Baird; John K Lynch; Philip A Wolf; Charles Kooperberg; Joseph C Larson; Sylvia Wassertheil-Smoller Journal: Stroke Date: 2008-02-21 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: Maha Almarwani; Subashan Perera; Jessie M VanSwearingen; Patrick J Sparto; Jennifer S Brach Journal: Gait Posture Date: 2015-11-30 Impact factor: 2.840