Validity, reliability, and measurement error of a sit-to-stand power test in older adults: A pre-registered study

Autor: Jordan M. Glenn, Andrew D. Vigotsky, Anoop Balachandran, Mark Belio, Lidwine B. Mokkink, Norberto Quiles
Přispěvatelé: Epidemiology and Data Science, APH - Methodology
Rok vydání: 2020
Předmět:
Zdroj: Balachandran, A T, Vigotsky, A D, Quiles, N, Mokkink, L B, Belio, M A & Glenn, J M 2021, ' Validity, reliability, and measurement error of a sit-to-stand power test in older adults: A pre-registered study ', Experimental Gerontology, vol. 145, 111202 . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.exger.2020.111202
Experimental Gerontology, 145:111202. Elsevier Inc.
ISSN: 1873-6815
0531-5565
DOI: 10.1016/j.exger.2020.111202
Popis: Objectives: Lower body power declines with age and is associated with decreased physical function in older adults. However, the majority of the tools available to measure power are expensive and require considerable space and expertise to operate. The purpose of this study was to assess the validity, reliability, and measurement error of a sit-to-stand power test (STSp) to assess lower body power. Methods: 51 community-dwelling adults, 65 years or older, completed a power test using a pneumatic leg press (LP), the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) that includes a test of balance, usual walking speed, and chair stand tests; Timed Up and Go (TUG) test at both usual and fast paces, and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs). A two-week test-retest assessed the reliability in 36 participants. The study hypotheses and analysis were pre-registered prior to data collection and statistical analyses were blinded. Results: The mean age was 71.3 years, with 63% females, and an average SPPB score of 10.6 (median = 12). STSp peak power was strongly correlated with LP (r = 0.90, 95% CI (0.82, 0.94). As hypothesized, the STSp peak power showed similar or higher correlations with physical function tests relative to LP peak power: SPPB (0.41 vs. 0.29), chair stand test (−0.44 vs. -0.35), TUG test at usual pace (−0.37 vs. −0.29) and fast pace (−0.41 vs. −0.34) and balance (0.33 vs. 0.22), but not for mobility (0.34 vs. 0.38) and function (0.41 vs. 0.48) questionnaire. For discriminant validity, as hypothesized, males showed higher STSp peak power compared to females (Δ = 492 W, p < .001, Cohen's d = 2.0). Test-retest assessment yielded an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.96 and a standard error of measurement of 70.4 W. No adverse events were reported or observed for both tests. Conclusion: The STSp showed adequate validity and reliability in measuring lower body power in community-dwelling older adults. The test is quick, relatively inexpensive, safe, and portable and thus should be considered for use in aging research.
Databáze: OpenAIRE
Externí odkaz: