Test–re-test reproducibility of activity capacity measures for children with an acquired brain injury
Objective: To determine test–re-test reproducibility of the Timed Up & Go (TUG) test, 30-second repetition maximum (repmax) of functional exercises, 6-Minute Walk Test (6MWT) and High-level Mobility Assessment Tool (HiMAT) in children with Acquired Brain Injury (ABI). Secondarily, to assess the...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Published: |
Informa UK Limited
2016
|
| Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/46511 |
| _version_ | 1848757578768580608 |
|---|---|
| author | Baque, E. Barber, L. Sakzewski, L. Boyd, Roslyn |
| author_facet | Baque, E. Barber, L. Sakzewski, L. Boyd, Roslyn |
| author_sort | Baque, E. |
| building | Curtin Institutional Repository |
| collection | Online Access |
| description | Objective: To determine test–re-test reproducibility of the Timed Up & Go (TUG) test, 30-second repetition maximum (repmax) of functional exercises, 6-Minute Walk Test (6MWT) and High-level Mobility Assessment Tool (HiMAT) in children with Acquired Brain Injury (ABI). Secondarily, to assess the accuracy between hand-timed and video-timed scores for the TUG test and HiMAT. Methods: Thirty children at least 1 year post-ABI (mean age at assessment = 11 years 11 months, SD = 2 years 4 months; 14 males; Gross Motor Function Classification Scale I = 17, II = 13) were assessed twice. Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC), standard error of measurement and minimum detectable change (MDC) were determined. The Bland-Altman method and 95% limits of agreement (LOA) were used to assess the agreement between hand and video-timed TUG test and HiMAT scores. Results: Test–re-test reproducibility was acceptable for the TUG test (ICC = 0.92; MDC = 1.2s); repmax of functional exercises (ICC = 0.84–0.98; MDC = 4–8 reps); 6MWT (ICC = 0.90; MDC = 69.38 m) and HiMAT (ICC = 0.98; MDC = 6). Comparison of hand and video scores for the TUG test and HiMAT demonstrated a mean difference of 0.23 (LOA = –0.3–0.7) and –0.07 (LOA = –1.99–1.85), respectively. Conclusions Test–re-test reproducibility of lower limb activity capacity measures in children with ABI are acceptable. The MDC scores provide a useful reference to interpret treatment effectiveness. Video timing was more accurate than hand-timing for the TUG test. |
| first_indexed | 2025-11-14T09:30:20Z |
| format | Journal Article |
| id | curtin-20.500.11937-46511 |
| institution | Curtin University Malaysia |
| institution_category | Local University |
| last_indexed | 2025-11-14T09:30:20Z |
| publishDate | 2016 |
| publisher | Informa UK Limited |
| recordtype | eprints |
| repository_type | Digital Repository |
| spelling | curtin-20.500.11937-465112017-09-13T13:37:32Z Test–re-test reproducibility of activity capacity measures for children with an acquired brain injury Baque, E. Barber, L. Sakzewski, L. Boyd, Roslyn Objective: To determine test–re-test reproducibility of the Timed Up & Go (TUG) test, 30-second repetition maximum (repmax) of functional exercises, 6-Minute Walk Test (6MWT) and High-level Mobility Assessment Tool (HiMAT) in children with Acquired Brain Injury (ABI). Secondarily, to assess the accuracy between hand-timed and video-timed scores for the TUG test and HiMAT. Methods: Thirty children at least 1 year post-ABI (mean age at assessment = 11 years 11 months, SD = 2 years 4 months; 14 males; Gross Motor Function Classification Scale I = 17, II = 13) were assessed twice. Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC), standard error of measurement and minimum detectable change (MDC) were determined. The Bland-Altman method and 95% limits of agreement (LOA) were used to assess the agreement between hand and video-timed TUG test and HiMAT scores. Results: Test–re-test reproducibility was acceptable for the TUG test (ICC = 0.92; MDC = 1.2s); repmax of functional exercises (ICC = 0.84–0.98; MDC = 4–8 reps); 6MWT (ICC = 0.90; MDC = 69.38 m) and HiMAT (ICC = 0.98; MDC = 6). Comparison of hand and video scores for the TUG test and HiMAT demonstrated a mean difference of 0.23 (LOA = –0.3–0.7) and –0.07 (LOA = –1.99–1.85), respectively. Conclusions Test–re-test reproducibility of lower limb activity capacity measures in children with ABI are acceptable. The MDC scores provide a useful reference to interpret treatment effectiveness. Video timing was more accurate than hand-timing for the TUG test. 2016 Journal Article http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/46511 10.3109/02699052.2016.1165869 Informa UK Limited restricted |
| spellingShingle | Baque, E. Barber, L. Sakzewski, L. Boyd, Roslyn Test–re-test reproducibility of activity capacity measures for children with an acquired brain injury |
| title | Test–re-test reproducibility of activity capacity measures for children with an acquired brain injury |
| title_full | Test–re-test reproducibility of activity capacity measures for children with an acquired brain injury |
| title_fullStr | Test–re-test reproducibility of activity capacity measures for children with an acquired brain injury |
| title_full_unstemmed | Test–re-test reproducibility of activity capacity measures for children with an acquired brain injury |
| title_short | Test–re-test reproducibility of activity capacity measures for children with an acquired brain injury |
| title_sort | test–re-test reproducibility of activity capacity measures for children with an acquired brain injury |
| url | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/46511 |