scholarly journals Test-retest reliability of force plate-derived measures of reactive stepping

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tyler M. Saumur ◽  
Sunita Mathur ◽  
Jacqueline Nestico ◽  
Stephen D. Perry ◽  
George Mochizuki ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Body Weight ◽  
Balance Control ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Force Plate ◽  
Correlation Coefficients ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Step Initiation ◽  
Absolute Test ◽  
Test Retest Reliability ◽  
Reactive Stepping

AbstractBackgroundCharacterizing reactive stepping is important to describe the response’s effectiveness. Measures of reactive stepping related to step initiation, execution, and termination phases have been frequently reported to characterize reactive balance control. However, the test-retest reliability of these measures are unknown.Research questionsWhat is the between- and within-session test-retest reliability of various force plate-derived measures of reactive stepping?MethodsNineteen young, healthy adults responded to 6 small (~8-10% of body weight) and 6 large perturbations (~13-15% of body weight) using an anterior lean-and-release system. Tests were conducted on two visits separated by at least two days. Participants were instructed to recover balance in as few steps as possible. Step onset, foot-off, swing, and restabilization times were extracted from force plates. Relative test-retest reliability was determined through intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Absolute test-retest reliability was assessed using the standard error of the measurement (SEM).ResultsFoot-off and swing times had the highest between- and within-session test-retest reliabilities regardless of perturbation size (between-session ICC=0.898–0.942; within-session ICC=0.455–0.753). Conversely, step onset and restabilization time had lower ICCs and wider CIs (between-session ICC=0.495–0.825; within-session ICC=−0.040–0.174). Between-session test-retest reliability was higher (ICC=0.495-0.942) for all measures than within-session test-retest reliability (ICC=−0.040–0.753). SEMs were low (3–10% of mean) for all measures, except time to restabilization (SEM=15-20% of mean), indicating good absolute reliability.SignificanceThese findings suggest multiple baseline sessions are needed for measuring restabilization and step onset times. The SEMs provide an index for measuring meaningful change due to an intervention.

Test–Retest Reliability of the Mini-BESTest in People With Mild to Moderate Multiple Sclerosis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
A Wallin ◽  
M Kierkegaard ◽  
E Franzén ◽  
S Johansson
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Sclerosis ◽  
Measurement Errors ◽  
Balance Control ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Repeated Measurements ◽  
Minimal Detectable Change ◽  
Detectable Change ◽  
Limits Of Agreement ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

Abstract Objective The mini-BESTest is a balance measure for assessment of the underlying physiological systems for balance control in adults. Evaluations of test–retest reliability of the mini-BESTest in larger samples of people with multiple sclerosis (MS) are lacking. The purpose of this study was to investigate test–retest reliability of the mini-BESTest total and section sum scores and individual items in people with mild to moderate overall MS disability. Methods This study used a test–retest design in a movement laboratory setting. Fifty-four people with mild to moderate overall MS disability according to the Expanded Disability Status scale (EDSS) were included, with 28 in the mild subgroup (EDSS 2.0–3.5) and 26 in the moderate subgroup (EDSS 4.0–5.5). Test–retest reliability of the mini-BESTest was evaluated by repeated measurements taken 1 week apart. Reliability and measurement error were analyzed. Results Test–retest reliability for the total scores were considered good to excellent, with intraclass correlation coefficients of .88 for the whole sample, .83 for the mild MS subgroup, and .80 for the moderate MS subgroup. Measurement errors were small, with standard error of measurement and minimal detectable change of 1.3 and 3.5, respectively, in mild MS, and 1.7 and 4.7, respectively, in moderate MS. The limits of agreement were − 3.4 and 4.6. Test–retest reliability for the section scores were fair to good or excellent; weighted kappa values ranged from .62 to .83. All items but 1 showed fair to good or excellent test–retest reliability, and percentage agreement ranged from 61% to 100%. Conclusions The mini-BESTest demonstrated good to excellent test–retest reliability and small measurement errors and is recommended for use in people with mild to moderate MS. Impact Knowledge of limits of agreement and minimal detectable change contribute to interpretability of the mini-BESTest total score. The findings of this study enhance the clinical usefulness of the test for evaluation of balance control and for designing individually customized balance training with high precision and accuracy in people with MS.

The Minnesota Manual Dexterity Test: Reliability, Validity and Reference Values Studies with Healthy Elderly People

1997 ◽  
Vol 64 (5) ◽  
pp. 270-276 ◽  
Author(s):  
Johanne Desrosiers ◽  
Annie Rochette ◽  
Réjean Hébert ◽  
Gina Bravo
Keyword(s):  
Elderly People ◽  
Reference Values ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Correlation Coefficients ◽  
Manual Dexterity ◽  
Test Reliability ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Healthy Elderly ◽  
Block Test ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

Several dexterity tests have been developed, including the Minnesota Rate of Manipulation Test (MRMT) and a new version, the Minnesota Manual Dexterity Test (MMDT). The objectives of the study were: a) to verify the test-retest reliability of the MMDT; b) to compare the MRMT and the MMDT; c) to study the concurrent validity of the MMDT; and d) to establish reference values for elderly people with the MMDT. Two hundred and forty-seven community-living healthy elderly were evaluated with the MMDT, and two other dexterity tests, the Box and Block Test (BBT) and the Purdue Pegboard (PP). Thirty-five of them were evaluated twice with the MMDT and 44 were evaluated with both the MMDT and MRMT. The results show that the test-retest reliability of the MMDT is acceptable to high (intraclass correlation coefficients of 0.79 to 0.87, depending on the subtest) and the validity of the test is demonstrated by significant correlations between the MMDT, the BBT and the PP (0.63 to 0.67). There is a high correlation (0.85 to 0.95) between the MMDT and the MMRT in spite of different results. The reference values will help occupational therapists to differentiate better between real dexterity difficulties and those that may be attributed to normal aging.

Psychometric Comparisons of 2 Versions of the Fugl-Meyer Motor Scale and 2 Versions of the Stroke Rehabilitation Assessment of Movement

2008 ◽  
Vol 22 (6) ◽  
pp. 737-744 ◽  
Author(s):  
I-Ping Hsueh ◽  
Miao-Ju Hsu ◽  
Ching-Fan Sheu ◽  
Su Lee ◽  
Ching-Lin Hsieh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Stroke Rehabilitation ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Correlation Coefficients ◽  
Stroke Patients ◽  
Chronic Patients ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Intraclass Correlation Coefficients ◽  
Mild Stroke ◽  
Test Retest Reliability ◽  
Rehabilitation Assessment

Objective. To provide empirical justification for selecting motor scales for stroke patients, the authors compared the psychometric properties (validity, responsiveness, test-retest reliability, and smallest real difference [SRD]) of the Fugl-Meyer Motor Scale (FM), the simplified FM (S-FM), the Stroke Rehabilitation Assessment of Movement instrument (STREAM), and the simplified STREAM (S-STREAM). Methods. For the validity and responsiveness study, 50 inpatients were assessed with the FM and the STREAM at admission and discharge to a rehabilitation department. The scores of the S-FM and the S-STREAM were retrieved from their corresponding scales. For the test-retest reliability study, a therapist administered both scales on a different sample of 60 chronic patients on 2 occasions. Results. Only the S-STREAM had no notable floor or ceiling effects at admission and discharge. The 4 motor scales had good concurrent validity (rho ≥ .91) and satisfactory predictive validity (rho = .72-.77). The scales showed responsiveness (effect size d ≥ 0.34; standardized response mean ≥ 0.95; P < .0001), with the S-STREAM most responsive. The test-retest agreements of the scales were excellent (intraclass correlation coefficients ≥ .96). The SRD of the 4 scales was 10% of their corresponding highest score, indicating acceptable level of measurement error. The upper extremity and the lower extremity subscales of the 4 showed similar results. Conclusions. The 4 motor scales showed acceptable levels of reliability, validity, and responsiveness in stroke patients. The S-STREAM is recommended because it is short, responsive to change, and able to discriminate patients with severe or mild stroke.

scholarly journals Adaptation and Psychometric Evaluation of the Chinese Counseling Competencies Scale-Revised

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wei Xia ◽  
William Ho Cheung Li ◽  
Tingna Liang ◽  
Yuanhui Luo ◽  
Laurie Long Kwan Ho ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Concurrent Validity ◽  
Convergent Validity ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Correlation Coefficients ◽  
Psychometric Evaluation ◽  
Counseling Competencies ◽  
Counselors In Training ◽  
Rater Reliability ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

Objectives: This study conducted a linguistic and psychometric evaluation of the Chinese Counseling Competencies Scale-Revised (CCS-R).Methods: The Chinese CCS-R was created from the original English version using a standard forward-backward translation process. The psychometric properties of the Chinese CCS-R were examined in a cohort of 208 counselors-in-training by two independent raters. Fifty-three counselors-in-training were asked to undergo another counseling performance evaluation for the test-retest. The confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was conducted for the Chinese CCS-R, followed by internal consistency, test-retest reliability, inter-rater reliability, convergent validity, and concurrent validity.Results: The results of the CFA supported the factorial validity of the Chinese CCS-R, with adequate construct replicability. The scale had a McDonald's omega of 0.876, and intraclass correlation coefficients of 0.63 and 0.90 for test-retest reliability and inter-rater reliability, respectively. Significantly positive correlations were observed between the Chinese CCS-R score and scores of performance checklist (Pearson's γ = 0.781), indicating a large convergent validity, and knowledge on drug abuse (Pearson's γ = 0.833), indicating a moderate concurrent validity.Conclusion: The results support that the Chinese CCS-R is a valid and reliable measure of the counseling competencies.Practice implication: The CCS-R provides trainers with a reliable tool to evaluate counseling students' competencies and to facilitate discussions with trainees about their areas for growth.

scholarly journals Reliability of Safe Maximum Lifting Determinations of a Functional Capacity Evaluation

2002 ◽  
Vol 82 (4) ◽  
pp. 364-371 ◽  
Author(s):  
Douglas P Gross ◽  
Michele C Battié
Keyword(s):  
Functional Capacity ◽  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Interrater Reliability ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Correlation Coefficients ◽  
Functional Capacity Evaluation ◽  
Measurement Variability ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Repeated Measures Design ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

Abstract Background and Purpose. Functional capacity evaluations (FCEs) are measurement tools used in predicting readiness to return to work following injury. The interrater and test-retest reliability of determinations of maximal safe lifting during kinesiophysical FCEs were examined in a sample of people who were off work and receiving workers' compensation. Subjects. Twenty-eight subjects with low back pain who had plateaued with treatment were enrolled. Five occupational therapists, trained and experienced in kinesiophysical methods, conducted testing. Methods. A repeated-measures design was used, with raters testing subjects simultaneously, yet independently. Subjects were rated on 2 occasions, separated by 2 to 4 days. Analyses included intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and 95% confidence intervals. Results. The ICC values for interrater reliability ranged from .95 to .98. Test-retest values ranged from .78 to .94. Discussion and Conclusion. Inconsistencies in subjects' performance across sessions were the greatest source of FCE measurement variability. Overall, however, test-retest reliability was good and interrater reliability was excellent.

scholarly journals Test-retest reliability and minimal detectable change of the Balance Evaluation Systems Test and its two abbreviated versions in persons with mild to moderate spinocerebellar ataxia: A pilot study

2020 ◽  
Vol 47 (4) ◽  
pp. 479-486
Author(s):  
Yuki Kondo ◽  
Kyota Bando ◽  
Yosuke Ariake ◽  
Wakana Katsuta ◽  
Kyoko Todoroki ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Spinocerebellar Ataxia ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Correlation Coefficients ◽  
Minimal Detectable Change ◽  
Detectable Change ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Evaluation Systems ◽  
Intraclass Correlation Coefficients ◽  
Interclass Correlation ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

BACKGROUND: The reliability of the evaluation of the Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest) and its two abbreviated versions are confirmed for balance characteristics and reliability. However, they are not utilized in cases of spinocerebellar ataxia (SCA). OBJECTIVE: We aimed to examine the test-retest reliability and minimal detectable change (MDC) of the BESTest and its abbreviated versions in persons with mild to moderate spinocerebellar ataxia. METHODS: The BESTest was performed in 20 persons with SCA at baseline and one month later. The scores of the abbreviated version of the BESTest were determined from the BESTest scores. The interclass correlation coefficient (1,1) was used as a measure of relative reliability. Furthermore, we calculated the MDC in the BESTest and its abbreviated versions. RESULTS: The intraclass correlation coefficients (1,1) and MDC at 95% confidence intervals were 0.92, 8.7(8.1%), 0.91, 4.1(14.5%), and 0.81, 5.2(21.6%) for the Balance, Mini-Balance, and Brief-Balance Evaluation Systems Tests, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The BESTest and its abbreviated versions had high test-retest reliability. The MDC values of the BESTest could enable clinicians and researchers to interpret changes in the balance of patients with SCA more precisely.

scholarly journals Test-retest reliability of visual-evoked potential habituation

Cephalalgia ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 36 (9) ◽  
pp. 831-839 ◽  
Author(s):  
Veronika Rauschel ◽  
Ruth Ruscheweyh ◽  
Siegbert Krafczyk ◽  
Andreas Straube
Keyword(s):  
Cortical Excitability ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Correlation Coefficients ◽  
Episodic Migraine ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Regression Slopes ◽  
Test Retest Reliability ◽  
Changes Over Time ◽  
Visual Evoked

Objective Habituation of visual-evoked potentials (VEPs) is typically described as deficient interictally in migraine patients, supposedly indicating altered cortical excitability. Use of this parameter for monitoring changes over time, e.g. under treatment, requires demonstration of test-retest reliability. Methods VEPs were recorded interictally in 41 episodic migraine patients and 40 controls. N75–P100 amplitudes were measured over six consecutive blocks of 75 VEPs each. Amplitude regression slopes and block ratios were used to quantify VEP habituation. Test-retest reliability was assessed over 15 minutes and two to three weeks. Results Controls showed significantly more negative VEP habituation slopes than migraine patients (−0.21 ± 0.40 vs. 0.04 ± 0.46 µV/block, p < 0.05). Results were similar for block ratios, though, in the migraine group, VEP habituation significantly increased from test to two- to three-week retest ( p < 0.05). In addition, VEP habituation test-retest correlations were mostly poor both in migraine patients and controls (intraclass correlation coefficients, 15 minutes: −0.13 to 0.30, two to three weeks: 0.07 to 0.59). Conclusions Deficient VEP habituation in migraine was confirmed. However, the test-retest reliability of VEP habituation was rather weak. Therefore, we suggest that VEP habituation should be used for evaluation of cortical excitability under treatment only at the group level and only when a control group with sham treatment is included.

scholarly journals The Reliability of Pharyngeal High Resolution Manometry with Impedance for Derivation of Measures of Swallowing Function in Healthy Volunteers

2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Taher I. Omari ◽  
Johanna Savilampi ◽  
Karmen Kokkinn ◽  
Mistyka Schar ◽  
Kristin Lamvik ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
High Resolution ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Correlation Coefficients ◽  
Interrater Agreement ◽  
Swallowing Function ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
High Resolution Manometry ◽  
Intraclass Correlation Coefficients ◽  
Test Retest Reliability ◽  
Swallow Function

Purpose. We evaluated the intra- and interrater agreement and test-retest reliability of analyst derivation of swallow function variables based on repeated high resolution manometry with impedance measurements.Methods. Five subjects swallowed10×10 mL saline on two occasions one week apart producing a database of 100 swallows. Swallows were repeat-analysed by six observers using software. Swallow variables were indicative of contractility, intrabolus pressure, and flow timing.Results. The average intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) for intra- and interrater comparisons of all variable means showedsubstantialtoexcellentagreement (intrarater ICC 0.85–1.00; mean interrater ICC 0.77–1.00). Test-retest results were less reliable. ICC for test-retest comparisons ranged fromslighttoexcellentdepending on the class of variable. Contractility variables differed most in terms of test-retest reliability. Amongst contractility variables, UES basal pressure showedexcellenttest-retest agreement (mean ICC 0.94), measures of UES postrelaxation contractile pressure showedmoderatetosubstantialtest-retest agreement (mean Interrater ICC 0.47–0.67), and test-retest agreement of pharyngeal contractile pressure ranged fromslighttosubstantial(mean Interrater ICC 0.15–0.61).Conclusions. Test-retest reliability of HRIM measures depends on the class of variable. Measures of bolus distension pressure and flow timing appear to be more test-retest reliable than measures of contractility.

scholarly journals Reliability of the ForceFrame With and Without a Fixed Upper-Limb Mold in Shoulder Rotation Strength Assessments Compared With Traditional Hand-Held Dynamometry

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-4
Author(s):  
Jamon Couch ◽  
Marc Sayers ◽  
Tania Pizzari
Keyword(s):  
Upper Limb ◽  
External Rotation ◽  
Intraclass Correlation ◽  
Correlation Coefficients ◽  
Shoulder Abduction ◽  
Minimal Detectable Change ◽  
Retest Reliability ◽  
Intraclass Correlation Coefficients ◽  
Shoulder Strength ◽  
Test Retest Reliability

Context: An imbalance between shoulder internal rotation (IR) and external rotation (ER) strength in athletes is proposed to increase the risk of sustaining a shoulder injury. Hand-held (HHD) and externally fixed dynamometry are reliable forms of assessing shoulder IR and ER strength. A new externally fixed device with an attachable fixed upper-limb mold (The ForceFrame) exists; however, its reliability in measuring shoulder strength is yet to be investigated. Objective: To determine the test–retest reliability of the ForceFrame, with and without the fixed upper-limb mold, in the assessment of shoulder IR and ER strength, as compared with HHD. Design: Test–retest reliability study. Setting: Laboratory, clinical. Participants: Twenty-two healthy and active individuals were recruited from the university community and a private physiotherapy practice. Main Outcome Measures: Maximal isometric shoulder IR and ER strength was measured using the ForceFrame and traditional HHD in neutral and at 90° shoulder abduction. Mean (SD) strength measures were calculated. Test–retest reliability was analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficients (3, 1). The SEM and minimal detectable change were calculated. Results: Good to excellent test–retest reliability was found for all shoulder strength tests across Hand-held dynamometry (HHD) and externally fixed dynamometry (EFD) are reliable forms (intraclass correlation coefficients [3, 1] = .854–.916). The minimal detectable changes ranged between 25.61 and 41.84 N across tests. Test–retest reliability was not affected by the dynamometer or testing position. Conclusions: The results from this study indicate that both the ForceFrame and HHD are suitable for measuring shoulder strength in clinical practice. The use of the fixed upper-limb mold with the ForceFrame does not improve reliability.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document