Augusto Boening, Aline A Scianni, Janayna A Martins, Cintia H Santuzzi, Fernanda Mg Liberato, Lucas R Nascimento
{"title":"6 分钟台阶试验的程序和测量特性：系统回顾与临床建议。","authors":"Augusto Boening, Aline A Scianni, Janayna A Martins, Cintia H Santuzzi, Fernanda Mg Liberato, Lucas R Nascimento","doi":"10.1177/02692155241229286","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To provide information regarding the procedures, safety, tolerability, and measurement properties of the 6-min step test.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and SPORTDiscus (from inception until January 2024).</p><p><strong>Review methods: </strong>Studies that examined adults with acute or chronic diseases, and outcomes related to procedures, safety, tolerability, or measurement properties of the 6-min step test were included. Outcome data were summarized and combined in meta-analyses. The quality of included studies was assessed by the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments checklist, and the quality of evidence was determined according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fourteen studies, involving 847 participants, were included. All studies performed the 6-min step test in 6 min; however, some studies varied the step height and the use of upper limb support. The test appears to be safe and well tolerated by individuals. Moderate- to high-quality evidence demonstrated appropriate results for test-retest reliability (4 studies; Intraclass correlation coefficient 0.96; 95% CI 0.91-0.98; <i>n</i> = 125), criterion validity (4 studies; <i>r</i> = 0.53; 95% CI 0.30-0.71; <i>n</i> = 307), and construct validity (4 studies; <i>r</i> = 0.63; 95% CI 0.52-0.73; <i>n</i> = 233).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This review provides recommendations for applying the 6-min step test in clinical and research settings. No adverse events were reported, and the test appears to be well tolerated. Adequate results were found for test-retest reliability, criterion validity, and construct validity.</p><p><strong>Review registration: </strong>PROSPERO (CRD42022347744).</p>","PeriodicalId":10441,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":"647-663"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Procedures and measurement properties of the 6-min step test: A systematic review with clinical recommendations.\",\"authors\":\"Augusto Boening, Aline A Scianni, Janayna A Martins, Cintia H Santuzzi, Fernanda Mg Liberato, Lucas R Nascimento\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/02692155241229286\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To provide information regarding the procedures, safety, tolerability, and measurement properties of the 6-min step test.</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and SPORTDiscus (from inception until January 2024).</p><p><strong>Review methods: </strong>Studies that examined adults with acute or chronic diseases, and outcomes related to procedures, safety, tolerability, or measurement properties of the 6-min step test were included. Outcome data were summarized and combined in meta-analyses. The quality of included studies was assessed by the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments checklist, and the quality of evidence was determined according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fourteen studies, involving 847 participants, were included. All studies performed the 6-min step test in 6 min; however, some studies varied the step height and the use of upper limb support. The test appears to be safe and well tolerated by individuals. Moderate- to high-quality evidence demonstrated appropriate results for test-retest reliability (4 studies; Intraclass correlation coefficient 0.96; 95% CI 0.91-0.98; <i>n</i> = 125), criterion validity (4 studies; <i>r</i> = 0.53; 95% CI 0.30-0.71; <i>n</i> = 307), and construct validity (4 studies; <i>r</i> = 0.63; 95% CI 0.52-0.73; <i>n</i> = 233).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This review provides recommendations for applying the 6-min step test in clinical and research settings. No adverse events were reported, and the test appears to be well tolerated. Adequate results were found for test-retest reliability, criterion validity, and construct validity.</p><p><strong>Review registration: </strong>PROSPERO (CRD42022347744).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10441,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Rehabilitation\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"647-663\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Rehabilitation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/02692155241229286\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/2/4 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02692155241229286","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
Procedures and measurement properties of the 6-min step test: A systematic review with clinical recommendations.
Objective: To provide information regarding the procedures, safety, tolerability, and measurement properties of the 6-min step test.
Data sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and SPORTDiscus (from inception until January 2024).
Review methods: Studies that examined adults with acute or chronic diseases, and outcomes related to procedures, safety, tolerability, or measurement properties of the 6-min step test were included. Outcome data were summarized and combined in meta-analyses. The quality of included studies was assessed by the Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments checklist, and the quality of evidence was determined according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system.
Results: Fourteen studies, involving 847 participants, were included. All studies performed the 6-min step test in 6 min; however, some studies varied the step height and the use of upper limb support. The test appears to be safe and well tolerated by individuals. Moderate- to high-quality evidence demonstrated appropriate results for test-retest reliability (4 studies; Intraclass correlation coefficient 0.96; 95% CI 0.91-0.98; n = 125), criterion validity (4 studies; r = 0.53; 95% CI 0.30-0.71; n = 307), and construct validity (4 studies; r = 0.63; 95% CI 0.52-0.73; n = 233).
Conclusion: This review provides recommendations for applying the 6-min step test in clinical and research settings. No adverse events were reported, and the test appears to be well tolerated. Adequate results were found for test-retest reliability, criterion validity, and construct validity.
期刊介绍：
Clinical Rehabilitation covering the whole field of disability and rehabilitation, this peer-reviewed journal publishes research and discussion articles and acts as a forum for the international dissemination and exchange of information amongst the large number of professionals involved in rehabilitation. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
