The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Same patient, different setting: to what extent do mobility measures concur?

Same patient, different setting: to what extent do mobility measures concur?
Same patient, different setting: to what extent do mobility measures concur?
Objectives: to compare standardised mobility measures performed by people with Parkinson’s disease in their own homes and the hospital gait laboratory.

Background: It is argued that people with Parkinson’s disease (PD) perform differently in a gait-laboratory compared to their own home. Such a systematic bias (or context effect) could render laboratory- or clinic-based mobility assessment invalid. We evaluated to what extent mobility measures in contrasting settings concurred.

Methods: seventy-five people with PD completed the Timed Up and Go Test (TUG), a 3m walk, the Standing-Start 180 Degree Turn Test (SS-180) and two on-the-spot turns at home and in a gait-laboratory at the same time of day, within two weeks: setting order was randomised. From video, we calculated the 95% Limits of Agreement (mean difference between settings ± two standard deviations (SD)).
Results: participants (median Hoehn and Yahr stage 2.5) were reassessed after a mean of 7 days (SD 2). Mean performances and differences between settings were as follows. TUG: 18s, 1s; Speed: 0.8m/s, 0m/s; Stride Length: 0.5m, 0m; Cadence: 104 steps/min, 1 step/min; SS-180: 5 steps in 3s, < 1 step and < 1s; Spot 180: 6 steps, < 1 step; and Spot 360: 11 steps, 1 step.

Conclusions: differences between settings were small and typical of repeated assessment in only one setting. Differences rarely exceeded 19 steps/min (Cadence); 0.1m (Stride Length); 0.3m/s (Speed); and 2 steps (SS-180 and Spot 180), for example. Performance was similar in both settings and we found no evidence of a context effect
0002-0729
P.ii60
Stack, E.
7adccc27-4910-41bb-adc4-409e00a89601
Pickering, R.
4a828314-7ddf-4f96-abed-3407017d4c90
Pressly, V.
4b68bcdc-43b4-4906-9f9d-fac02695b923
McElwaine, T.
c01719c3-d7df-4f0e-87af-411d1b89783d
Frankel, J.
bb603d65-8435-4d3c-8722-ced85521bf8b
Roberts, H.
5ea688b1-ef7a-4173-9da0-26290e18f253
Stack, E.
7adccc27-4910-41bb-adc4-409e00a89601
Pickering, R.
4a828314-7ddf-4f96-abed-3407017d4c90
Pressly, V.
4b68bcdc-43b4-4906-9f9d-fac02695b923
McElwaine, T.
c01719c3-d7df-4f0e-87af-411d1b89783d
Frankel, J.
bb603d65-8435-4d3c-8722-ced85521bf8b
Roberts, H.
5ea688b1-ef7a-4173-9da0-26290e18f253

Stack, E., Pickering, R., Pressly, V., McElwaine, T., Frankel, J. and Roberts, H. (2008) Same patient, different setting: to what extent do mobility measures concur? Age and Ageing, 38, supplement 2, P.ii60.

Record type: Article

Abstract

Objectives: to compare standardised mobility measures performed by people with Parkinson’s disease in their own homes and the hospital gait laboratory.

Background: It is argued that people with Parkinson’s disease (PD) perform differently in a gait-laboratory compared to their own home. Such a systematic bias (or context effect) could render laboratory- or clinic-based mobility assessment invalid. We evaluated to what extent mobility measures in contrasting settings concurred.

Methods: seventy-five people with PD completed the Timed Up and Go Test (TUG), a 3m walk, the Standing-Start 180 Degree Turn Test (SS-180) and two on-the-spot turns at home and in a gait-laboratory at the same time of day, within two weeks: setting order was randomised. From video, we calculated the 95% Limits of Agreement (mean difference between settings ± two standard deviations (SD)).
Results: participants (median Hoehn and Yahr stage 2.5) were reassessed after a mean of 7 days (SD 2). Mean performances and differences between settings were as follows. TUG: 18s, 1s; Speed: 0.8m/s, 0m/s; Stride Length: 0.5m, 0m; Cadence: 104 steps/min, 1 step/min; SS-180: 5 steps in 3s, < 1 step and < 1s; Spot 180: 6 steps, < 1 step; and Spot 360: 11 steps, 1 step.

Conclusions: differences between settings were small and typical of repeated assessment in only one setting. Differences rarely exceeded 19 steps/min (Cadence); 0.1m (Stride Length); 0.3m/s (Speed); and 2 steps (SS-180 and Spot 180), for example. Performance was similar in both settings and we found no evidence of a context effect

Full text not available from this repository.

More information

Published date: 2008
Organisations: Faculty of Medicine

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 70547
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/70547
ISSN: 0002-0729
PURE UUID: 960d6e23-2334-4b84-a23f-843c0c6707f5
ORCID for H. Roberts: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-5291-1880

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 10 Feb 2010
Last modified: 12 Sep 2020 01:35

Export record

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×