Test-retest reliability of upper-limb proprioception and balance tests in older nursing home residents

Translation and Psychometric Properties of the Portuguese Version of the Timed Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (TIADL)

(1) Background: to examine the psychometric properties of the Portuguese version of the Timed Instrumental Activities of Daily Living (TIADL) in nursing home residents. (2) Methods: Fifty-two participants (85.8 ± 4.2 years) were assessed on two occasions, 10-14 days apart. The same rater administered all assessments. Internal consistency was analysed through Cronbach's α. The reliability was estimated using the intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), and the standard error of the mean (SEM) was used to estimate the minimal detectable change (MDC). Construct validity was determined by Spearman's correlation coefficients. (3) Results: For internal consistency, Cronbach's α (0.81) revealed high internal reliability. All of the subtests demonstrated good or excellent reliability and also presented acceptable measurement precision, considering the criterion SEM < SD/2. According to Spearman's rho, correlations with the Portuguese version of the TIADL, the Useful Field of View test, and semantic and phonemic fluency tests were significant, with moderate positive and negative correlations (0.4 < rs < 0.69). (4) Conclusions: The Portuguese version of the TIADL had good to excellent test-retest reliability (ICC > 0.90) and acceptable measurement precision. This test could be a valuable clinical tool for assessing actual performance in instrumental activities of daily living in nursing home residents.

Measures of attributes of locomotor capacity in older people: a systematic literature review following the COSMIN methodology

BACKGROUND

Locomotor capacity (LC) is an important domain of intrinsic capacity and key determinant of functional ability and well-being in older age. The United Nations Decade of Healthy Ageing (2021-2030) calls for strengthening data and research on healthy ageing, including the measurement of older persons' LC. To advance the measurement and monitoring of LC, there is pressing need to identify valid and reliable measures.

OBJECTIVE

To identify all the available tools that were validated for measurement of LC or of its specific attributes in older people and to assess the methodological quality of the studies and measurement properties of the tools.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

SETTING

Anywhere (Community-dwelling; long-term care facility; etc.).

SUBJECTS

Older people.

METHODS

We used highly sensitive search strategies to search the following databases: Medline, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL and PsycINFO. The study was conducted following the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) methodology for systematic review of outcome measurement instruments.

RESULTS

A total of 125 studies were included, which assessed tools for balance (n = 84), muscle power (n = 12), muscle strength (n = 32, including four studies about tools for balance and muscle power) and endurance (n = 1). No studies on tools for muscle function, joint function, or locomotor capacity overall, were retrieved. We identified 69 clinician-report or objective assessment tools for balance, 30 for muscle strength, 12 for muscle power and 1 endurance assessment tool. The GRADE assessment of quality of evidence showed that only a few tools have high quality evidence for both sufficient validity and reliability: The Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest), the Mini-Balance Evaluation Systems Test (Mini-BESTest), the Berg Balance Scale (BBS) and the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test.

CONCLUSIONS

A few tools with high quality evidence for sufficient validity and reliability are currently available for balance assessment in older people that may be recommended for use in clinical and research settings. Further validation studies are required for muscle strength, muscle power and endurance assessment tools.

Physical and Motor Fitness Tests for Older Adults Living in Nursing Homes: A Systematic Review

This systematic review aimed to identify the physical/motor fitness tests for nursing home residents and to examine their psychometric properties. Electronic databases were searched for articles published between January 2005 and October 2021 using MeSh terms and relevant keywords. Of the total of 4196 studies identified, 3914 were excluded based on title, abstracts, or because they were duplicates. The remaining 282 studies were full-text analyzed, and 41 were excluded, resulting in 241 studies included in the review. The most common physical component assessed was muscle strength; 174 (72.2%) studies assessed this component. Balance (138 studies, 57.3%) and agility (102 studies, 42.3%) were the second and third components, respectively, most widely assessed. In this review, we also describe the most used assessment tests for each physical/motor component. Some potentially relevant components such as manual dexterity and proprioception have been little considered. There are few studies assessing the psychometric properties of the tests for nursing home residents, although the data show that, in general, they are reliable. This review provides valuable information to researchers and health-care professionals regarding the physical/motor tests used in nursing home residences, helping them select the screening tools that could most closely fit their study objectives.

Evaluation of the instrumented Timed Up and Go test as a tool to measure exercise intervention effects in nursing home residents: results from a PROCARE substudy

Background and objectives

To achieve independence in activities of daily living, a certain level of functional ability is necessary. The instrumented Timed Up and Go (iTUG) test provides guidance for appropriate interventions, for example, when considering the subphases within the TUG. Therefore, we evaluated the iTUG as a tool to measure the effects of a multicomponent exercise intervention on the iTUG subphases in nursing home residents.

Methods

Fifty long-term nursing home residents (34 women, 82.7 ± 6.46 [65–91] years; 16 men, 78.6 ± 7.0 [62–90] years) performed the iTUG test before and after a 16-week intervention period (2 × 45–60 min/week). According to the attendance rates, participants were divided into three groups.

Results

The total iTUG duration decreased from baseline to posttest, F(2,46) = 3.50, p = 0.038, η2p = 0.132. We observed significant correlations between the attendance rates and the total iTUG duration (r(50) = 0.328, p = 0.010). However, we did not observe significant group × time interaction effects in the subphases. The Barthel Index moderated the effect between attendance rate and the total duration of the iTUG test, ΔR2 = 8.34%, F(1,44) = 4.69, p = 0.036, 95% CI [0.001, 0.027].

Conclusions

We confirmed the effectiveness of the iTUG as a tool to measure exercise intervention effects in nursing home residents, especially when participants exhibit high attendance rates. That said, mobility needs to be considered in a more differentiated way, taking into account parameters in the subphases to detect changes more sensitively and to derive recommendations in a more individualized way.

Test-retest reliability of the functional reach test and the hand grip strength test in older adults using nursing home services

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to determine the absolute and relative test-retest reliability of the functional reach test (FRT) and the handgrip strength test (HGST) in older adults using nursing homes.

METHODS

Participants (≥ 65 years old), living in nursing homes or using their day care services, were distributed into a group without cognitive impairment (GWCI, n = 43) and a group with mild cognitive impairment (GCI; n = 22). A 1-week test-retest was performed for the FRT and the HGST. Relative reliability was measured by the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC_3.1), and absolute reliability by the standard error of measurement (SEM), minimal detectable change (MDC₉₅), and Bland-Altman plots.

RESULTS

The ICC showed high reliability for the FRT (GWCI, ICC = 0.83; GCI, ICC = 0.87) and the HGST (ICC ≥ 0.95 in both hands and participant groups). The absolute reliability was good: FRT, SEM = 2.96/2.29, MDC₉₅ = 8.20/6.35 for the GWCI and the GCI, respectively; HGST dominant hand SEM = 1.26/0.82, MDC₉₅ = 3.50/2.29, and HGST non-dominant hand SEM = 1.05/0.80, MDC₉₅ = 2.90/2.21, for the GWCI and the GCI, respectively. Bland-Altman showed that there was not a systematic bias for the tests in both groups.

DISCUSSION

Findings show that the FRT and the HGST are reliable, have acceptable measurement error, and may be used for research and clinical purposes to assess functional balance and strength of the hands in older adults using nursing homes.