Journal•ISSN: 0031-9023
Physical Therapy
Oxford University Press
About: Physical Therapy is an academic journal published by Oxford University Press. The journal publishes majorly in the area(s): Medicine & Health care. It has an ISSN identifier of 0031-9023. Over the lifetime, 7736 publications have been published receiving 353541 citations.
Papers published on a yearly basis
Papers
More filters
TL;DR: The relationship between the raters' judgments was significant and the reliability was good, and it is believed these results to be positive enough to encourage further trials of the modified Ashworth scale for grading spasticity.
Abstract: We undertook this investigation to determine the interrater reliability of manual tests of elbow flexor muscle spasticity graded on a modified Ashworth scale. We each independently graded the elbow flexor muscle spasticity of 30 patients with intracranial lesions. We agreed on 86.7% of our ratings. The Kendall's tau correlation between our grades was .847 (p less than .001). Thus, the relationship between the raters' judgments was significant and the reliability was good. Although the results were limited to the elbow flexor muscle group, we believe them to be positive enough to encourage further trials of the modified Ashworth scale for grading spasticity.
4,788 citations
TL;DR: The reliability of ratings of PEDro scale items varied from "fair" to "substantial," and the reliability of the total PEDo score was "fair to "good.
Abstract: Background and Purpose. Assessment of the quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is common practice in systematic reviews. However, the reliability of data obtained with most quality assessment scales has not been established. This report describes 2 studies designed to investigate the reliability of data obtained with the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale developed to rate the quality of RCTs evaluating physical therapist interventions. Method. In the first study, 11 raters independently rated 25 RCTs randomly selected from the PEDro database. In the second study, 2 raters rated 120 RCTs randomly selected from the PEDro database, and disagreements were resolved by a third rater; this generated a set of individual rater and consensus ratings. The process was repeated by independent raters to create a second set of individual and consensus ratings. Reliability of ratings of PEDro scale items was calculated using multirater kappas, and reliability of the total (summed) score was calculated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC [1,1]). Results. The kappa value for each of the 11 items ranged from .36 to .80 for individual assessors and from .50 to .79 for consensus ratings generated by groups of 2 or 3 raters. The ICC for the total score was .56 (95% confidence interval=.47–.65) for ratings by individuals, and the ICC for consensus ratings was .68 (95% confidence interval=.57–.76). Discussion and Conclusion. The reliability of ratings of PEDro scale items varied from “fair” to “substantial,” and the reliability of the total PEDro score was “fair” to “good.”
3,458 citations
TL;DR: The issue of statistical testing of kappa is considered, including the use of confidence intervals, and appropriate sample sizes for reliability studies using kappa are tabulated.
Abstract: Purpose. This article examines and illustrates the use and interpretation of the kappa statistic in musculoskeletal research. Summary of Key Points. The reliability of clinicians' ratings is an important consideration in areas such as diagnosis and the interpretation of examination findings. Often, these ratings lie on a nominal or an ordinal scale. For such data, the kappa coefficient is an appropriate measure of reliability. Kappa is defined, in both weighted and unweighted forms, and its use is illustrated with examples from musculoskeletal research. Factors that can influence the magnitude of kappa (prevalence, bias, and nonindependent ratings) are discussed, and ways of evaluating the magnitude of an obtained kappa are considered. The issue of statistical testing of kappa is considered, including the use of confidence intervals, and appropriate sample sizes for reliability studies using kappa are tabulated. Conclusions. The article concludes with recommendations for the use and interpretation of kappa.
3,427 citations
TL;DR: The TUG is a sensitive and specific measure for identifying community-dwelling adults who are at risk for falls and the ability to predict falls is not enhanced by adding a secondary task when performing the TUG.
Abstract: Background and Purpose. This study examined the sensitivity and specificity of the Timed Up & Go Test (TUG) under single-task versus dual-task conditions for identifying elderly individuals who are prone to falling. Subjects. Fifteen older adults with no history of falls (mean age578 years, SD56, range565‐ 85) and 15 older adults with a history of 2 or more falls in the previous 6 months (mean age586.2 years, SD56, range576 ‐95) participated. Methods. Time taken to complete the TUG under 3 conditions (TUG, TUG with a subtraction task [TUG cognitive], and TUG while carrying a full cup of water [TUG manual]) was measured. A multivariate analysis of variance and discriminant function and logistic regression analyses were performed. Results. The TUG was found to be a sensitive (sensitivity587%) and specific (specificity587%) measure for identifying elderly individuals who are prone to falls. For both groups of older adults, simultaneous performance of an additional task increased the time taken to complete the TUG, with the greatest effect in the older adults with a history of falls. The TUG scores with or without an additional task (cognitive or manual) were equivalent with respect to identifying fallers and nonfallers. Conclusions and Discussion. The results suggest that the TUG is a sensitive and specific measure for identifying communitydwelling adults who are at risk for falls. The ability to predict falls is not enhanced by adding a secondary task when performing the TUG. [Shumway-Cook A, Brauer S, Woollacott M. Predicting the probability for falls in community-dwelling older adults using the Timed Up & Go Test. Phys Ther. 2000;80:896 ‐903.]
3,023 citations
TL;DR: Preliminary descriptive data suggest that physical therapists should use age-related data when interpreting patient data obtained for the 6MW, BBS, TUG, CGS and FGS measurements, which showed high test-retest reliability.
Abstract: Background and Purpose. The interpretation of patient scores on clinical tests of physical mobility is limited by a lack of data describing the range of performance among people without disabilities. The purpose of this study was to provide data for 4 common clinical tests in a sample of community-dwelling older adults. Subjects. Ninety-six community-dwelling elderly people (61–89 years of age) with independent functioning performed 4 clinical tests. Methods. Data were collected on the Six-Minute Walk Test (6MW), Berg Balance Scale (BBS), and Timed Up & Go Test (TUG) and during comfortable- and fast-speed walking (CGS and FGS). Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were used to determine the test-retest reliability for the 6MW, TUG, CGS, and FGS measurements. Data were analyzed by gender and age (60–69, 70–79, and 80–89 years) cohorts, similar to previous studies. Means, standard deviations, and 95% confidence intervals for each measurement were calculated for each cohort. Results. The 6MW, TUG, CGS, and FGS measurements showed high test-retest reliability (ICC [2,1]=.95–.97). Mean test scores showed a trend of age-related declines for the 6MW, BBS, TUG, CGS, and FGS for both male and female subjects. Discussion and Conclusion. Preliminary descriptive data suggest that physical therapists should use age-related data when interpreting patient data obtained for the 6MW, BBS, TUG, CGS and FGS. Further data on these clinical tests with larger sample sizes are needed to serve as a reference for patient comparisons.
1,956 citations