Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 3 Relative and absolute test-retest reliability

From: Recommended motor assessments based on psychometric properties in individuals with dementia: a systematic review

  Variable Study Relative test-retest reliability Absolute test-retest reliability
ICC Rating Risk of bias Inconsistency Imprecision Indirectness Quality of evidence MDC95% Rating Risk of bias Inconsistency Imprecision Indirectness Quality of evidence
Balance
 FICSIT-4 Score 1 study of adequate quality (n = 58)a [17] 0.79–0.82 + Serious No n = 50–100 No Low 58.9–71.1% Serious No n = 50–100 No Low
 Modified Clinical Test of Sensory Interaction of Balance Sway velocity 1 study of adequate quality (n = 14) [51] 0.91 + Serious No n < 50 No Very low 36.5% Serious No n < 50 No Very low
 Limits of Stability Reaction time 1 study of adequate quality (n = 14) [51] 0.52 Serious No n < 50 No Very low 38.0% Serious No n < 50 No Very low
Movement velocity 1 study of adequate quality (n = 14) [51] 0.48 Serious No n < 50 No Very low 38.9% Serious No n < 50 No Very low
Maximum excursion 1 study of adequate quality (n = 14) [51] 0.68 Serious No n < 50 No Very low 15.9% ? Serious No n < 50 No Very low
Directional control 1 study of adequate quality (n = 14) [51] 0.71 + Serious No n < 50 No Very low 21.8% ? Serious No n < 50 No Very low
 Physiomat-Trail-Making Task [53] Score 1 study of adequate quality (n = 74) [53] 0.90 + Serious No n = 50–100 No Low Not assessed
Sway Path 1 study of adequate quality (n = 47–73)b [53] 0.47–0.82 +/− depending on condition Serious No n = 50–100 No Low Not assessed
Time 1 study of adequate quality (n = 47–73)b [53] 0.55–0.83 +/− depending on condition Serious No n = 50–100 No Low Not assessed
 Physiomat-Follow-The-Ball Task Sway Path 1 study of adequate quality (n = 73) [53] 0.84 + Serious No n = 50–100 No Low Not assessed
Time 1 study of adequate quality (n = 73) [53] 0.79 + Serious No n = 50–100 No Low Not assessed
 FR Distance 2 studies of adequate quality (n = 29) [14, 51] 0.81–0.84 + No No n < 50 No Low 15.4–68.9% ?/↓ No Yes n < 50 No Not assigned (inconsistency)
 Hill Step Test Number of steps 1 study of adequate quality (n = 14) [51] 0.87 + Serious No n < 50 No Very low 26.2% ? Serious No n < 50 No Very low
 Step Quick Turn Test Time 1 study of adequate quality (n = 14) [51] 0.55 Serious No n < 50 No Very low 38.1% Serious No n < 50 No Very low
Sway 1 study of adequate quality (n = 14) [51] 0.64 Serious No n < 50 No Very low 29.7% ? Serious No n < 50 No Very low
 Figure of Eight Test Time 1 study of adequate quality (n = 46)a [17] 0.85–0.94 + Serious No n < 50 No Very low 36.9–37.9% Serious No n < 50 No Very low
 GMWT Time 2 studies of adequate quality (n = 95)a [43, 63] 0.93–0.99 + No No n = 50–100 No Moderate 19.6–31.2% ?/↓ No No n = 50–100 No Moderate
Number of oversteps 2 studies of adequate quality (n = 95)a [43, 63] 0.57–0.96 ? No Yes n = 50–100 No Not assigned (inconsistency) 33.3–225.7% No Yes n = 50–100 No Not assigned (inconsistency)
 BBS Score 2 studies of adequate quality (n = 68) [14, 43] 0.95–0.99 + No No n = 50–100 No Moderate 10.2–38.6% ?/↓ No No n = 50–100 No Moderate
Mobility and gait
 TUG Time 6/5 studies of adequate quality (n = 200/191)a [6, 14, 17, 43, 51, 102] 0.72–0.99 + No No No No High 15.8–39.6% +h/↓ No No No No High
 Cognitive TUG Time 1 study of adequate quality (n = 10) [51] 0.51 Serious No n < 50 No Very low 36.2% +h/↓ Serious No n < 50 No Very low
 Manual TUG Time 1 study of adequate quality (n = 14) [51] 0.70 + Serious No n < 50 No Very low 26.7% +h Serious No n < 50 No Very low
 6 m WT Walking speed 1 study of adequate quality (n = 58)a [17] 0.83–0.89 + Serious No n = 50–100 No Low 31.6–41.5% -i/↓ Serious No n = 50–100 No Low
Time 1 study of adequate quality (n = 9–10)b [102] 0.92–0.95 + Serious No n < 50 No Very low Not assessed
Number of steps 1 study of adequate quality (n = 9–10)b [102] 0.80–0.90 + Serious No n < 50 No Very low Not assessed
 4 m WT Time 1 study of adequate quality (n = 53) [43] 0.85 + Serious No n = 50–100 No Low 84.3% -i/↓ Serious No n = 50–100 No Low
 Instrumented gait analysis Walking speed 4/3 studies of adequate quality (n = 93/85)a, d, e [6, 26, 51, 121] 0.50–0.98 + (except for NeuroCom Balance Master) No No n = 50–100 No Moderate 10.2–48.3% +i/↓ No No n = 50–100 No Moderate
Step length 2 studies of adequate quality (n = 34)a, d, e [51, 121] 0.75–0.98 + No No n < 50 No Low 7.0–35.6% ?/↓ No No n < 50 No Low
Step width 2 studies of adequate quality (n = 34) a, d, e [51, 121] 0.89–0.95 + No No n < 50 No Low 20.0–24.7% ? No No n < 50 No Low
Stride length 2 studies/1 study of adequate quality (n = 28/20)e [26, 121] 0.97–0.98 + No No n < 50 No Low 6.8–8.5% ? Serious No n < 50 No Very low
Cadence 2 studies/1 study of adequate quality (n = 28/20)e [26, 121] 0.88–0.91 + No No n < 50 No Low 7.1–7.5% ? Serious No n < 50 No Very low
Swing time 2 studies/1 study of adequate quality (n = 28/20)e [26, 121] 0.89–0.96 + No No n < 50 No Low 7.0–7.1% ? Serious No n < 50 No Very low
Stance time 1 study of adequate quality (n = 20)e [121] 0.70–0.73 + Serious No n < 50 No Very Low 8.6–8.7% ? Serious No n < 50 No Very low
Toe in/out angle 1 study of adequate quality (n = 20)e [121] 0.91–0.93 + Serious No n < 50 No Very Low 28.2–33.5% ?/↓ Serious No n < 50 No Very low
Walking speed variability 1 study of adequate quality (n = 16) [5] 0.66 Serious No n < 50 No Very Low 77.8% Serious No n < 50 No Very low
Stride length variability 1 study of adequate quality (n = 16) [5] 0.80 + Serious No n < 50 No Very Low 71.7% Serious No n < 50 No Very low
Stride width variability 1 study of adequate quality (n = 16) [5] 0.83 + Serious No n < 50 No Very Low 46.9% Serious No n < 50 No Very low
Cadence variability 1 study of adequate quality (n = 16) [5] 0.65 Serious No n < 50 No Very Low 41.4% Serious No n < 50 No Very low
Strength
 5x STS Time 2 studies/1 study of adequate quality (n = 24/14) [51, 102] 0.80–0.94 + No No n < 50 No Low 29.9% ? Serious No n < 50 No Very low
 STS on NeuroCom Balance Master Rising Index 1 study of adequate quality (n = 14) [51] 0.95 + Serious No n < 50 No Very low 21.8% ? Serious No n < 50 No Very low
COG sway velocity 1 study of adequate quality (n = 14) [51] 0.02 Serious No n < 50 No Very low 80.2% Serious No n < 50 No Very low
 Modified 30s CST Repetitions 1 study of adequate quality (n = 52)a [17] 0.79–0.88 + Serious No n = 50–100 No Low 33.2–45.7% Serious No n = 50–100 No Low
 Handgrip dynamometer Force 3 studies/1 study of adequate quality (n = 143/57)a [17, 102, 120] 0.42–0.98 + (except for severe dementia) No No No No High 34.9–36.8% Serious No n = 50–100 No Low
 Maximum isometric strength assessed with dynamometers Peak force 1 studies of adequate quality (n = 11–12)f [102] 0.63–0.71 ? Serious Yes n < 50 No Not assigned (inconsistency) Not assessed
(Normalised) torque 1 studies of adequate quality (n = 60)a [114] 0.95–0.98 + Serious No n = 50–100 No Low Not assessed
Endurance
 6 min WT Distance 2 studies/1 study of adequate quality (n = 84/51)a, c [6, 118] 0.76–0.98 + No No n = 50–100 No Moderate 21.2–28.9% ? Serious No n = 50–100 No Low
Walking speed 1 study of adequate quality (n = 33)c [118] 0.75–0.89 + Serious No n < 50 No Very Low Not assessed
Functional performance
 E-ADL Test Score 1 study of doubtful quality (n = 42) [110] r = 0.73g ? Very serious No n < 50 No Very Low Not assessed
  1. 4 m WT 4-m walk test, 5x STS Five Times Sit-to-Stand Test, 6 m WT 6-m walk test, 6 min WT 6-min walk test, 30s CST 30-s chair stand test, BBS Berg Balance Scale, COG Centre of gravity, E-ADL Test Erlangen Test of Activities of Daily Living, FICSIT-4 Frailty and Injuries: Cooperative Studies of Intervention Techniques - subtest 4, FR Functional Reach Test, GMWT Groningen Meander Walking Test, ICC Intraclass correlation coefficient, MDC95% Percentage minimal detectable changes at 95% confidence interval, n Total number of participants, STS Sit-to-Stand, TUG Timed Up & Go Test.
  2. Rating according to COSMIN criteria for good measurement properties: + = sufficient, − = insufficient,? = indeterminate, ↓ = unacceptable absolute test-retest reliability.
  3. a test-retest reliability was assessed for different subgroups, b test-retest reliability was assessed for different conditions, c test-retest reliability was assessed for 2 different raters and 2 different between-test intervals, d test-retest reliability was assessed with 2 different devices, e test-retest reliability was assessed with 2 analysis sets, f test-retest reliability was assessed for 3 muscle groups, g Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient, h minimal important change (TUG) = 10.1 s [17, 119], i minimal important change (walking speed) = 0.21 m/s [17, 119]