Dataset Information

The validity and reliability of the four square step test in different adult populations: a systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The four square step test (FSST) was first validated in healthy older adults to provide a measure of dynamic standing balance and mobility. The FSST has since been used in a variety of patient populations. The purpose of this systematic review is to determine the validity and reliability of the FSST in these different adult patient populations.

Methods

The literature search was conducted to highlight all the studies that measured validity and reliability of the FSST. Six electronic databases were searched including AMED, CINAHL, MEDLINE, PEDro, Web of Science and Google Scholar. Grey literature was also searched for any documents relevant to the review. Two independent reviewers carried out study selection and quality assessment. The methodological quality was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool, which is a validated tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies, and the COSMIN four-point checklist, which contains standards for evaluating reliability studies on the measurement properties of health instruments.

Results

Fifteen studies were reviewed studying community-dwelling older adults, Parkinson's disease, Huntington's disease, multiple sclerosis, vestibular disorders, post stroke, post unilateral transtibial amputation, knee pain and hip osteoarthritis. Three of the studies were of moderate methodological quality scoring low in risk of bias and applicability for all domains in the QUADAS-2 tool. Three studies scored "fair" on the COSMIN four-point checklist for the reliability components. The concurrent validity of the FSST was measured in nine of the studies with moderate to strong correlations being found. Excellent Intraclass Correlation Coefficients were found between physiotherapists carrying out the tests (ICC = .99) with good to excellent test-retest reliability shown in nine of the studies (ICC = .73-.98).

Conclusions

The FSST may be an effective and valid tool for measuring dynamic balance and a participants' falls risk. It has been shown to have strong correlations with other measures of balance and mobility with good reliability shown in a number of populations. However, the quality of the papers reviewed was variable with key factors, such as sample size and test set up, needing to be addressed before the tool can be confidently used in these specified populations.

SUBMITTER: Moore M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5594590 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The validity and reliability of the four square step test in different adult populations: a systematic review.

Moore Martha M Barker Karen K

Systematic reviews 20170911 1

<h4>Background</h4>The four square step test (FSST) was first validated in healthy older adults to provide a measure of dynamic standing balance and mobility. The FSST has since been used in a variety of patient populations. The purpose of this systematic review is to determine the validity and reliability of the FSST in these different adult patient populations.<h4>Methods</h4>The literature search was conducted to highlight all the studies that measured validity and reliability of the FSST. Si ...[more]

PMID: 28893312

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and purposePreventing subsequent falls in persons recovering from hip fracture is paramount. The Four Square Step Test (FSST) is a fast, easy measure of dynamic balance, with times more than 15 seconds previously associated with multiple fall risk in older adults. This study investigates among hip fracture patients (1) FSST performance, and how (2) unique population characteristics (such as fracture side) and (3) cognition impact FSST performance.MethodsPatients with hip fracture (n = 40) 60 years and older came from an ancillary study to a larger randomized controlled trial testing two 16-week in-home physical therapy interventions after completion of usual care rehabilitation. Baseline measurers included: FSST, demographics, fracture characteristics, Modified Mini-Mental State Examination (3MS), Hooper Visual Organization Test (HVOT), and Trails Making Tests (TMT) A and B.ResultsOf 40 patients with hip fracture, 13 did not complete the FSST at baseline and were significantly older (P = .040) and performed worse on cognitive tests (3MS, HVOT, TMT-B; P < .05). Mean FSST time was 24.3 ± 13.1 seconds for the other 27, of whom 7 finished in less than 15 seconds. A significant 3-way interaction was observed, such that those with left-side pertrochanteric fractures who performed poorly on the HVOT did significantly worse on the FSST (P < .01, R2 = 0.93).DiscussionAlmost one-third of patients with hip fracture could not perform the FSST after completing usual care rehabilitation. Inability to perform the FSST was not random, as those without the FSST were physically and cognitively worse than those who did perform the FSST. Among those who could attempt the FSST, few performed well. Cognitive ability related to spatial orientation and fracture characteristics such as fracture side and fracture type has a synergistic effect on FSST performance.ConclusionsThis is one of the first studies to assess the FSST in a population with hip fracture. At 4 months after hip fracture, most patients cannot perform the FSST in less than 15 seconds. Fracture side and fracture type appear important to FSST performance, as does cognition. More work needs to be done longitudinally to study the FSST in patients with hip fracture.

Project description:BACKGROUND:To assess whether commercial-grade activity monitors are appropriate for measuring step counts in older adults, it is essential to evaluate their measurement properties in this population. OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to evaluate test-retest reliability and criterion validity of step counting in older adults with self-reported intact and limited mobility from 6 commercial-grade activity monitors: Fitbit Charge, Fitbit One, Garmin vívofit 2, Jawbone UP2, Misfit Shine, and New-Lifestyles NL-1000. METHODS:For test-retest reliability, participants completed two 100-step overground walks at a usual pace while wearing all monitors. We tested the effects of the activity monitor and mobility status on the absolute difference in step count error (%) and computed the standard error of measurement (SEM) between repeat trials. To assess criterion validity, participants completed two 400-meter overground walks at a usual pace while wearing all monitors. The first walk was continuous; the second walk incorporated interruptions to mimic the conditions of daily walking. Criterion step counts were from the researcher tally count. We estimated the effects of the activity monitor, mobility status, and walk interruptions on step count error (%). We also generated Bland-Altman plots and conducted equivalence tests. RESULTS:A total of 36 individuals participated (n=20 intact mobility and n=16 limited mobility; 19/36, 53% female) with a mean age of 71.4 (SD 4.7) years and BMI of 29.4 (SD 5.9) kg/m2. Considering test-retest reliability, there was an effect of the activity monitor (P<.001). The Fitbit One (1.0%, 95% CI 0.6% to 1.3%), the New-Lifestyles NL-1000 (2.6%, 95% CI 1.3% to 3.9%), and the Garmin vívofit 2 (6.0%, 95 CI 3.2% to 8.8%) had the smallest mean absolute differences in step count errors. The SEM values ranged from 1.0% (Fitbit One) to 23.5% (Jawbone UP2). Regarding criterion validity, all monitors undercounted the steps. Step count error was affected by the activity monitor (P<.001) and walk interruptions (P=.02). Three monitors had small mean step count errors: Misfit Shine (-1.3%, 95% CI -19.5% to 16.8%), Fitbit One (-2.1%, 95% CI -6.1% to 2.0%), and New-Lifestyles NL-1000 (-4.3%, 95 CI -18.9% to 10.3%). Mean step count error was larger during interrupted walking than continuous walking (-5.5% vs -3.6%; P=.02). Bland-Altman plots illustrated nonsystematic bias and small limits of agreement for Fitbit One and Jawbone UP2. Mean step count error lay within an equivalence bound of ±5% for Fitbit One (P<.001) and Misfit Shine (P=.001). CONCLUSIONS:Test-retest reliability and criterion validity of step counting varied across 6 consumer-grade activity monitors worn by older adults with self-reported intact and limited mobility. Walk interruptions increased the step count error for all monitors, whereas mobility status did not affect the step count error. The hip-worn Fitbit One was the only monitor with high test-retest reliability and criterion validity.

Dataset Information

The validity and reliability of the four square step test in different adult populations: a systematic review.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

The validity and reliability of the four square step test in different adult populations: a systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets