We have located links that may give you full text access.
Reliability and Validity of the Timed Up and Go Test With a Motor Task in People With Chronic Stroke.
Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 2017 November
OBJECTIVES: To examine (1) the intra-rater, interrater, and test-retest reliabilities of the timed Up and Go test with a motor task (TUGmotor ) in terms of the number of steps taken in the test and completion time in a population with chronic stroke; (2) the relation between stroke-specific impairments and the number of steps taken in the test and the completion time; (3) the minimum detectable change in TUGmotor times; and (4) the cutoff time that best discriminates the performance of people with stroke from that of older adults without stroke.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional study.
SETTING: University-based rehabilitation center.
PARTICIPANTS: A sample (N=65) of chronic stroke survivors (n=33) and healthy older adults (n=32).
INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: TUGmotor times and number of steps taken; Fugl-Meyer Assessment for the Lower Extremities score; handheld dynamometer measurements of hip abductor, knee flexor and extensor, and ankle dorsiflexor and plantar flexor muscle strength; 5-times sit-to-stand test time, Berg Balance Scale score; conventional timed Up and Go test time, and Activities-specific Balance Confidence scale and Community Integration Measure questionnaire scores.
RESULTS: The TUGmotor completion times and number of steps demonstrated excellent intra-rater, interrater, and test-retest reliabilities. The TUGmotor times correlated significantly with the Fugl-Meyer Assessment for the Lower Extremities and Berg Balance Scale scores, with hip abductor, knee flexor, ankle dorsiflexor and plantar flexor strength on the paretic side, with 5-times sit-to-stand test times, and with times on the conventional timed Up and Go test. The minimum detectable change in TUGmotor time was 3.53 seconds in stroke survivors. A TUGmotor cutoff time of 13.49 seconds was found to best discriminate the performance of stroke survivors from that of older adults without stroke.
CONCLUSIONS: The TUGmotor is a reliable, valid, and easy-to-administer clinical tool for assessing advanced functional mobility after a stroke.
DESIGN: Cross-sectional study.
SETTING: University-based rehabilitation center.
PARTICIPANTS: A sample (N=65) of chronic stroke survivors (n=33) and healthy older adults (n=32).
INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: TUGmotor times and number of steps taken; Fugl-Meyer Assessment for the Lower Extremities score; handheld dynamometer measurements of hip abductor, knee flexor and extensor, and ankle dorsiflexor and plantar flexor muscle strength; 5-times sit-to-stand test time, Berg Balance Scale score; conventional timed Up and Go test time, and Activities-specific Balance Confidence scale and Community Integration Measure questionnaire scores.
RESULTS: The TUGmotor completion times and number of steps demonstrated excellent intra-rater, interrater, and test-retest reliabilities. The TUGmotor times correlated significantly with the Fugl-Meyer Assessment for the Lower Extremities and Berg Balance Scale scores, with hip abductor, knee flexor, ankle dorsiflexor and plantar flexor strength on the paretic side, with 5-times sit-to-stand test times, and with times on the conventional timed Up and Go test. The minimum detectable change in TUGmotor time was 3.53 seconds in stroke survivors. A TUGmotor cutoff time of 13.49 seconds was found to best discriminate the performance of stroke survivors from that of older adults without stroke.
CONCLUSIONS: The TUGmotor is a reliable, valid, and easy-to-administer clinical tool for assessing advanced functional mobility after a stroke.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app