Journal of Korean Physical Therapy Science (대한물리치료과학회지)

Korean Physical Therapy Science (대한물리치료과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Discriminant and predictive validity of TUG, F8WT, FSST, ST for community walking levels in chronic stroke survivors

만성 뇌졸중 환자들의 지역사회 보행 수준 구별을 위한 일어나 걸어가기 검사, 8자 모양 경로 보행 검사, 네 막대 스텝 검사, 스텝 검사의 변별력과 예측 타당도

  • Lee, DongGeon (Department of Physical Therapy, Shinsegae Geriatric hospital) ;
  • An, SeungHeon (Department of Physical Therapy, National Rehabilitation Center) ;
  • Lee, GyuChang (Department of Physical Therapy, Kyungnam University)
  • Received : 2020.08.20
  • Accepted : 2020.09.17
  • Published : 2020.09.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background: There are many situations where walking in an actual community needs to change direction along with walking on a straight path, and this situation needs to be reflected in assessing walking ability of the community. Therefore, in this study, we tried to determine whether the assessments can distinguish the level of walking in the community. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Methods: Fifty-two survivors with chronic stroke have participated in the study. According to the evaluation result of 10mWT, the subjects of 0.8m/s and above were classified as the group who could walk in the community (n=22), and the subjects of 0.4m/s~0.8m/s were classified into the group who could not walk in the community (n=30). Modified Rivermead Mobility Index, Postural Assessment Scale for Stroke, Fugl-Meyer Assessment, Berg Balance Scale, 10-meter Walk Test (10mWT) were used to evaluate the motor skills. Furthermore, Activities-specific Balance Confidence Scale was used to evaluate psychological factors, and Timed Up & Go Test (TUG), Figure-of-Eight Walk Test (F8WT), Four Square Step Test (FSST), Step Test (ST) were applied to evaluate dynamic balance and mobility. Results: As a result for distinguishing walking levels in the community, TUG was 14.25 seconds, F8WT was 13.34 seconds, FST was 19.43 seconds, and ST of affected side and non-affected side were 6.5 points and 7.5 points, respectively. TUG (AUC=0.923), F8WT (AUC=0.905), and FST (AUC=0.941) were highly accurate, but the ST of affected side and non-affected side (AUC=0.806, 0.705) showed the accuracy of the median degree, respectively. Conclusion: To distinguish walking levels in the community of survivors with chronic stroke, TUG and FSST have been found to be the best assessment tool, and in particular, FSST could be very valuable in clinical use as the most important assessment tool to distinguish walking levels in the community.

Keywords

References

  1. 김성철, 허영구. 편마비 환자의 트레드밀과 체중지지의 트레드밀 훈련이 균형능력 및 보행능력에 미치는 영향. 대한물리치료과학회지 2018;25(1):31-43. https://doi.org/10.26862/jkpts.2018.06.25.1.31
  2. Benaim C, Perennou DA, Villy J, et al. Validation of a standardized assessment of postural control in stroke patients: the Postural Assessment Scale for Stroke Patients (PASS). Stroke 1999;30(9):1862-8. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.STR.30.9.1862
  3. Berg KO, Maki BE, Williams JI, et al. Clinical and laboratory measures of postural balance in an elderly population. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 1992;73(11):1073-80.
  4. Bijleveld-Uitman M, van de Port I, Kwakkel G. Is gait speed or walking distance a better predictor for community walking after stroke? J Rehabil Med 2013;45(6):535-40. https://doi.org/10.2340/16501977-1147
  5. Blennerhassett JM, Jayalath VM. The Four Square Step Test is a feasible and valid clinical test of dynamic standing balance for use in ambulant people poststroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2008;89(11):2156-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2008.05.012
  6. Courtine G, Schieppati M. Human walking along a curved path. I. Body trajectory, segment orientation and the effect of vision. Eur J Neurosci. 2003;18(1):177-90. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1460-9568.2003.02736.x
  7. Dite W, Temple VA. A clinical test of stepping and change of direction to identify multiple falling older adults. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2002;83(11):1566-71. https://doi.org/10.1053/apmr.2002.35469
  8. Duncan PW, Propst M, Nelson SG. Reliability of the Fugl-Meyer assessment of sensorimotor recovery following cerebrovascular accident. Phys Ther 1983;63(10):1606-10. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/63.10.1606
  9. Flansbjer UB, Holmback AM, Downham D, et al. Reliability of gait performance tests in men and women with hemiparesis after stroke. J Rehabil Med 2005;37(2):75-82. https://doi.org/10.1080/16501970410017215
  10. Fugl-Meyer AR, Jaasko L, Leyman I, et al. The post-stroke hemiplegic patient. 1. a method for evaluation of physical performance. Scand J Rehabil Med 1975;7(1):13-31.
  11. Fulk GD, Reynolds C, Mondal S, et al. Predicting home and community walking activity in people with stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2010;91(10):1582-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2010.07.005
  12. Fulk GD, He Y, Boyne P, et al. Predicting Home and Community Walking Activity Poststroke. Stroke 2017;48(2):406-411. https://doi.org/10.1161/STROKEAHA.116.015309
  13. Goh EY, Chua SY, Hong SJ, et al. Reliability and concurrent validity of Four Square Step Test scores in subjects with chronic stroke: a pilot study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2013;94(7):1306-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2013.01.027
  14. Greiner M, Pfeiffer D, Smith RD. Principles and practical application of the receiver-operating characteristic analysis for diagnostic tests. Prev Vet Med 2000;45(1-2):23-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-5877(00)00115-X
  15. Hill KD, Berhardt J, McGann AM, et al. A new test of dynamic standing balance for stroke patients: reliability, validity and comparison with healthy elderly. Physiother Can 1996;48:257-62. https://doi.org/10.3138/ptc.48.4.257
  16. Hong SJ, Goh EY, Chua SY, Ng SS. Reliability and validity of step test scores in subjects with chronic stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2012;93(6):1065-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2011.12.022
  17. Kirschbaum JB, Axelson PW, Longmuir PE, et al. Pedestrian crossings. In: Designing sidewalks and trails for access. Part II: best practices design guide. Washington (DC): U.S. Department of Transportation: Federal Highway Administration; 2001.
  18. Lennon S, Johnson L. The modified rivermead mobility index: validity and reliability. Disabil Rehabil 2000;22(18): 833-9. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638280050207884
  19. Lerner-Frankiel M, Vargas S, Brown M, et al. Functional community ambulation: what are your criteria? Clin Manage 1986;6:12-5.
  20. Liaw LJ, Hsieh CL, Lo SK, et al. The relative and absolute reliability of two balance performance measures in chronic stroke patients. Disabil Rehabil 2008;30(9):656-61. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638280701400698
  21. Lord SE, McPherson K, McNaughton HK, et al. Community ambulation after stroke: how important and obtainable is it and what measures appear predictive? Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2004;85(2):234-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2003.05.002
  22. Lord SE, Rochester L. Measurement of community ambulation after stroke: current status and future developments. Stroke 2005;36(7):1457-61. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.STR.0000170698.20376.2e
  23. Perry J, Garrett M, Gronley JK, Mulroy SJ. Classification of walking handicap in the stroke population. Stroke 1995;26(6):982-9. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.STR.26.6.982
  24. Powell LE, Myers AM. The Activities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) Scale. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 1995;50A(1):M28-34.
  25. Rosa MC, Marques A, Demain S, et al. Fast gait speed and self-perceived balance as valid predictors and discriminators of independent community walking at 6 months post-stroke--a preliminary study. Disabil Rehabil 2015;37(2):129-34. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2014.911969
  26. Salbach NM, Mayo NE, Higgins J, et al. Responsiveness and predictability of gait speed and other disability measures in acute stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 2001;82(9):1204-12. https://doi.org/10.1053/apmr.2001.24907
  27. Segal AD, Orendurff MS, Czerniecki JM, et al. Local dynamic stability in turning and straight-line gait. J Biomech 2008;41(7):1486-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2008.02.012
  28. Shumway-Cook A, Patla AE, Stewart A, et al. Environmental demands associated with community mobility in older adults with and without mobility disabilities. Phys Ther 2002;82(7):670-81. https://doi.org/10.1093/ptj/82.7.670
  29. Tsang RC, Chau RM, Cheuk TH, et al. The measurement properties of modified Rivermead mobility index and modified functional ambulation classification as outcome measures for Chinese stroke patients. Physiother Theory Pract 2014;30(5):353-9. https://doi.org/10.3109/09593985.2013.876563
  30. van de Port IG, Kwakkel G, Lindeman E. Community ambulation in patients with chronic stroke: how is it related to gait speed? J Rehabil Med 2008;40(1):23-7. https://doi.org/10.2340/16501977-0114
  31. Wong SS, Yam MS, Ng SS. The Figure-of-Eight Walk test: reliability and associations with stroke-specific impairments. Disabil Rehabil 2013;35(22):1896-902. https://doi.org/10.3109/09638288.2013.766274