20米跑、水平跳跃和四界测试测量神经功能受损患者高水平活动能力的效度和信度

IF 0.9 Q4 REHABILITATION
Marek Gorski Master of Education (Physical Education), Grant Scroggie Master of Health Science, Terrence Haines PhD
{"title":"20米跑、水平跳跃和四界测试测量神经功能受损患者高水平活动能力的效度和信度","authors":"Marek Gorski Master of Education (Physical Education),&nbsp;Grant Scroggie Master of Health Science,&nbsp;Terrence Haines PhD","doi":"10.1016/j.hkpj.2015.03.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>High-level mobility (HLM) training including running forms an integral part of physical rehabilitation for neurologically impaired patients.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>This study examines the validity and reliability of three quickly administrable measures of HLM, namely, the 20-m run, horizontal leap, and four-bound tests in patients with neurological disorders.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This is a retrospective data audit of 62 patients (23 women, 37.1%; 39 men, 62.9%) participating in the HLM (running retraining) task. All participants were recovering from neurological conditions such as stroke, brain injury, brain/spinal tumour, Guillain–Barré syndrome, and cerebral palsy complications.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>High levels of test–retest reliability of the investigated tests (interclass correlation coefficient &gt; 0.95) were obtained. The 95% minimum detectable changes were as follows: 20-m run, 1.9 seconds; horizontal leap, 0.20 m; four-bound test, 0.57 m. The area under the receiver-operated characteristic curve was 0.96 for the 20-m run, 0.90 for the horizontal leap, and 0.91 for the four-bound test, which suggests high validity of the tests to discriminate between participants who were classified as “running” and those as “not running”. Participants performing at &lt; 7.2 seconds for the 20-m run test or ≥ 0.75 m for the horizontal leap test or 4.0 m for the four-bound test were most likely classified as running.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The 20-m run, horizontal leap, and four-bound tests are valid and reliable objective measures of HLM when administered in people with neurological conditions.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":44774,"journal":{"name":"Hong Kong Physiotherapy Journal","volume":"33 2","pages":"Pages 59-66"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2015-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.hkpj.2015.03.003","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Validity and reliability of the 20-m run, horizontal leap, and four-bound tests measuring high-level mobility in neurologically impaired patients\",\"authors\":\"Marek Gorski Master of Education (Physical Education),&nbsp;Grant Scroggie Master of Health Science,&nbsp;Terrence Haines PhD\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.hkpj.2015.03.003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>High-level mobility (HLM) training including running forms an integral part of physical rehabilitation for neurologically impaired patients.</p></div><div><h3>Objective</h3><p>This study examines the validity and reliability of three quickly administrable measures of HLM, namely, the 20-m run, horizontal leap, and four-bound tests in patients with neurological disorders.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>This is a retrospective data audit of 62 patients (23 women, 37.1%; 39 men, 62.9%) participating in the HLM (running retraining) task. All participants were recovering from neurological conditions such as stroke, brain injury, brain/spinal tumour, Guillain–Barré syndrome, and cerebral palsy complications.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>High levels of test–retest reliability of the investigated tests (interclass correlation coefficient &gt; 0.95) were obtained. The 95% minimum detectable changes were as follows: 20-m run, 1.9 seconds; horizontal leap, 0.20 m; four-bound test, 0.57 m. The area under the receiver-operated characteristic curve was 0.96 for the 20-m run, 0.90 for the horizontal leap, and 0.91 for the four-bound test, which suggests high validity of the tests to discriminate between participants who were classified as “running” and those as “not running”. Participants performing at &lt; 7.2 seconds for the 20-m run test or ≥ 0.75 m for the horizontal leap test or 4.0 m for the four-bound test were most likely classified as running.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>The 20-m run, horizontal leap, and four-bound tests are valid and reliable objective measures of HLM when administered in people with neurological conditions.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44774,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Hong Kong Physiotherapy Journal\",\"volume\":\"33 2\",\"pages\":\"Pages 59-66\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.hkpj.2015.03.003\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Hong Kong Physiotherapy Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1013702515000214\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hong Kong Physiotherapy Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1013702515000214","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

高水平运动(HLM)训练包括跑步是神经损伤患者物理康复的一个组成部分。目的探讨20米跑、水平跳跃和四界试验三种快速给药的HLM测量方法在神经系统疾病患者中的效度和信度。方法回顾性分析62例患者的资料,其中女性23例,占37.1%;39名男性(62.9%)参加了跑步再训练任务。所有参与者均从中风、脑损伤、脑/脊髓肿瘤、格林-巴罗综合征和脑瘫并发症等神经系统疾病中恢复过来。结果被调查的测试具有较高的重测信度(类间相关系数>0.95)。95%最小可检测变化如下:20米跑1.9秒;水平跳跃,0.20米;四界检验,0.57 m。20米跑、水平跳跃和四界测试的特征曲线下面积分别为0.96、0.90和0.91,表明测试对“跑步”和“不跑步”参与者的区分具有较高的效度。参与者在<20米跑试验7.2秒、水平跳跃试验≥0.75米、四跳试验4.0米最可能被归类为跑步。结论20米跑、水平跳跃和四界试验是神经系统疾病患者HLM的有效、可靠的客观测量方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Validity and reliability of the 20-m run, horizontal leap, and four-bound tests measuring high-level mobility in neurologically impaired patients

Background

High-level mobility (HLM) training including running forms an integral part of physical rehabilitation for neurologically impaired patients.

Objective

This study examines the validity and reliability of three quickly administrable measures of HLM, namely, the 20-m run, horizontal leap, and four-bound tests in patients with neurological disorders.

Methods

This is a retrospective data audit of 62 patients (23 women, 37.1%; 39 men, 62.9%) participating in the HLM (running retraining) task. All participants were recovering from neurological conditions such as stroke, brain injury, brain/spinal tumour, Guillain–Barré syndrome, and cerebral palsy complications.

Results

High levels of test–retest reliability of the investigated tests (interclass correlation coefficient > 0.95) were obtained. The 95% minimum detectable changes were as follows: 20-m run, 1.9 seconds; horizontal leap, 0.20 m; four-bound test, 0.57 m. The area under the receiver-operated characteristic curve was 0.96 for the 20-m run, 0.90 for the horizontal leap, and 0.91 for the four-bound test, which suggests high validity of the tests to discriminate between participants who were classified as “running” and those as “not running”. Participants performing at < 7.2 seconds for the 20-m run test or ≥ 0.75 m for the horizontal leap test or 4.0 m for the four-bound test were most likely classified as running.

Conclusion

The 20-m run, horizontal leap, and four-bound tests are valid and reliable objective measures of HLM when administered in people with neurological conditions.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
6.70%
发文量
13
审稿时长
24 weeks
期刊介绍: The Hong Kong Physiotherapy Journal is the official journal of the Hong Kong Physiotherapy Association Limited (HKPA Ltd). This peer-reviewed journal aims to contribute to and document the advancements in the principles and practice of physiotherapy in Hong Kong.The Hong Kong Physiotherapy Journal is published annually and papers are categorized into research reports, treatment reports, technical reports, literature reviews, and letters to the editor.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信