The reliability and minimal detectable change of Timed Up and Go test in individuals with grade 1-3 knee osteoarthritis

Ahmad Alghadir, Shahnawaz Anwer, Jean-Michel Brismée, Ahmad Alghadir, Shahnawaz Anwer, Jean-Michel Brismée

Abstract

Background: The Timed Up and Go (TUG) test is quick and easy tests to assess patients' functional mobility. However, its reliability in individuals with knee osteoarthritis (OA) has not been well established. The aims of this study were to determine the reliability and minimal detectable change of the TUG test in individuals with doubtful to moderate (Grade 1-3) knee OA.

Methods: Sixty-five subjects (25 male, 40 female), aged 45-70 years, with knee OA participated. Inter-rater reliability was assessed using two observers at different times of the same day in an alternating order. Intra-rater reliability was assessed on two consecutive visits with a 2-day interval. The standard error of measurement (SEM) and the minimum detectable change (MDC) were calculated to determine statistically meaningful changes.

Results: Intra-rater and inter-rater reliability were 0.97 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.95 - 0.98) and 0.96 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.94 - 0.97), respectively. The MDC, based on measurements by a single rater and between raters, was 1.10 and 1.14 seconds, respectively.

Conclusions: The TUG is a reliable test with adequate MDC for clinical use in individuals with doubtful to moderate knee OA.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Bland-Altman plot of difference of two raters with mean (bias) and ± standard deviation (SD) of differences of two raters
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Bland-Altman plot of difference of two readings for the same rater with mean (bias) and ± standard deviation (SD) of differences of two readings

References

    1. Helmick CG, Felson DT, Lawrence RC, Gabriel S, Hirsch R, Kwoh CK, et al. Estimates of the prevalence of arthritis and other rheumatic conditions in the United States. Part I Arthritis Rheum. 2008;58(1):15–25. doi: 10.1002/art.23177.
    1. Hootman JM, Helmick CG. Projections of US prevalence of arthritis and associated activity limitations. Arthritis Rheum. 2006;54(1):226–229. doi: 10.1002/art.21562.
    1. Al-Arfaj A, Al-Boukai AA. Prevalence of radiographic knee osteoarthritis in Saudi Arabia. Clin Rheumatol. 2002;21(2):142–145. doi: 10.1007/s10067-002-8273-8.
    1. Murray CJL, Lopez AD. The global burden of disease. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 1997.
    1. Hurley MV, Scott DL, Rees J, Newham DJ. Sensorimotor changes and functional performance in patients with knee osteoarthritis. Ann Rheum Dis. 1997;56(11):641–648. doi: 10.1136/ard.56.11.641.
    1. McAlindon TE, Cooper C, Kirwan JR, Dieppe PA. Determinants of disability in osteoarthritis of the knee. Ann Rheum Dis. 1993;52(4):258–262. doi: 10.1136/ard.52.4.258.
    1. Slemenda C, Brandt KD, Heilman DK, Mazzuca S, Braunstein EM, Katz BP, et al. Quadriceps weakness and osteoarthritis of the knee. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127(2):97–104. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-127-2-199707150-00001.
    1. Podsiadlo D, Richardson S. The timed “Up & Go”: a test of basic functional mobility for frail elderly persons. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1991;39(2):142–148. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1991.tb01616.x.
    1. Hughes C, Osman C, Woods AK. Relationship among performance on stair ambulation, Functional Reach, and Timed Up and Go tests in older adults. Issues on Aging. 1998;21:18–22.
    1. 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(9):896–903.
    1. Morris S, Morris ME, Iansek R. Reliability of measurements obtained with the Timed “Up & Go” Test in people with Parkinson disease. Phys Ther. 2001;81(2):810–818.
    1. Thompson M, Medley A. Performance of individuals with Parkinson’s disease on the Timed Up & Go. Neurol Rep. 1998;22:16–21. doi: 10.1097/01253086-199822010-00009.
    1. Schoppen T, Boonstra A, Groothoff JW, de Vries J, Goeken LN, Eisma WH. The Timed “Up & Go” test: reliability and validity in persons with unilateral lower limb amputation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1999;80:825–828. doi: 10.1016/S0003-9993(99)90234-4.
    1. Yeung TSM, Wessel J, Stratford P, Macdermid J. The Timed Up and Go Test for Use on an Inpatient Orthopaedic Rehabilitation Ward. JOSPT. 2008;38(7):410–417. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2008.2657.
    1. Dobson F, Hinman RS, Roos EM, Abbott JH, Stratford P, Davis AM. Bet al: OARSI recommended performance-based tests to assess physical function in people diagnosed with hip or knee osteoarthritis. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2013;21(8):1042–1052. doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2013.05.002.
    1. Kennedy DM, Stratford PW, Wessel J, Gollish JD, Penney D. Assessing stability and change of four performance measures: a longitudinal study evaluating outcome following total hip and knee arthroplasty. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2005;6:3. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-6-3.
    1. Wright AA, Cook CE, Baxter GD, Dockerty JD, Abbott JH. A comparison of 3 methodological approaches to defining major clinically important improvement of 4 performance measures in patients with hip osteoarthritis. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2011;41:319–327. doi: 10.2519/jospt.2011.3515.
    1. French HP, Fitzpatrick M, FitzGerald O. Responsiveness of physical function outcomes following physiotherapy intervention for osteoarthritis of the knee: an outcome comparison study. Physiotherapy. 2011;97:302–308. doi: 10.1016/j.physio.2010.03.002.
    1. Mizner RL, Petterson SC, Clements KE, Zeni JA, Jr, Irrgang JJ, Snyder-Mackler L. Measuring functional improvement after total knee arthroplasty requires both performance-based and patient-report assessments. A longitudinal analysis of outcomes. J Arthroplasty. 2011;26:728–737. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2010.06.004.
    1. Parent E, Moffet H. Comparative responsiveness of locomotor tests and questionnaires used to follow early recovery after total knee arthroplasty. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002;83:70–80. doi: 10.1053/apmr.2002.27337.
    1. Dobson F, Hinman RS, Hall M, Terwee CB, Roos EM, Bennell KL. Measurement properties of performance-based measures to assess physical function in hip and knee osteoarthritis: a systematic review. Osteoarthritis Cartilage. 2012;20(12):1548–1562. doi: 10.1016/j.joca.2012.08.015.
    1. Norén AM, Bogren U, Bolin J, Stenström C. Balance assessment in patients with peripheral arthritis: applicability and reliability of some clinical assessments. Physiother Res Int. 2001;6(4):193–204. doi: 10.1002/pri.228.
    1. Altman R, Asch E, Bloch D, Bole G, Borenstein D, Brandt K, et al. Development of criteria for the classification and reporting of osteoarthritis. Classification of osteoarthritis of the knee. Diagnostic and Therapeutic Criteria Committee of the American Rheumatism Association. Arthritis Rheum. 1986;29(8):1039–1049. doi: 10.1002/art.1780290816.
    1. Kellgren J, Lawrence J. Radiological assessment of osteoarthrosis. Ann Rheum Dis. 1957;16:494–502. doi: 10.1136/ard.16.4.494.
    1. Gallasch CH, Alexandre NM. The measurement of musculoskeletal pain intensity: a comparison of four methods. Rev Gaucha Enferm. 2007;28:260–265.
    1. Ferraz MB, Quaresma MR, Aquino LR, Atra E, Tugwell P, Goldsmith CH. Reliability of pain scales in the assessment of literate and illiterate patients with rheumatoid arthritis. J Rheumatol. 1990;17:1022–1024.
    1. White House SL, Lingard LA, Katz JN, Learmonth ID. Developmental and testing of a reduced WOMAC function scale. JBJS. 2003;85:706–711.
    1. Bellamy N, Buchanan WW, Goldsmith CH, Campbell J, Stitt PW. Validation study of WOMAC: a health status instrument for measuring clinically important patient relevant outcomes to antirheumatic drug therapy in patients with osteoarthritis of the hip or knee. J Rheumatol. 1988;15:1833–1840.
    1. Lydick E, Epstein RS. Interpretation of quality of life changes. Qual Life Res. 1993;2:221–226. doi: 10.1007/BF00435226.
    1. Wyrwich KW, Wolinsky FD. Identifying meaningful intra-individual change standards for health-related quality of life measures. J Eval Clin Pract. 2000;6:39–49. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2753.2000.00238.x.
    1. Portney LG, Watkins MP. Foundations of clinical research: applications to practice. Stamford: Appleton & Lange; 1993.
    1. Giladi N, Herman T, Reider-Groswasser II, Gurevich T, Hausdorff JM. Clinical characteristics of elderly patients with a cautious gait of unknown origin. J Neurol. 2005;252:300–306. doi: 10.1007/s00415-005-0641-2.
    1. Joint Committee on Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing of the American Educational Research Association. American Psychological Association . National Council on Measurement in Education. Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington (DC): American Educational Research Association; 2002.
    1. Bedson J, Jordan K, Croft P. How do GPs use x rays to manage chronic knee pain in the elderly? A case study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2003;62:450–454. doi: 10.1136/ard.62.5.450.
    1. Royal College of Radiologists . Making the best use of a Department of Clinical Radiology. Guidelines for doctors. Fourth edition. London: Royal College of Radiologists; 1998.
    1. Dutch Orthopaedic Society . Guideline diagnostics and management of hip and knee osteoarthritis [Richtlijn diagnostiek en behandeling van heup- en knieartrose. Nederlandse Orthopaedische Vereniging] 2007.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorer og samarbejdspartnere

Medicinske tilstande

Narkotikainterventioner

3
Abonner