1
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Responsiveness and Minimal Clinically Important Difference of the Five Times Sit-to-Stand Test in Patients with Stroke

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          This study aimed to analyze the responsiveness of the 5STS test among stroke patients and to estimate the MCIDs (minimal clinically important differences) for different severity levels of community ambulation and stages of recovery. The 5STS and comparator instruments (gait speed and Functional Ambulatory Category (FAC)) were evaluated at baseline. These measures were repeated at 4 (Stage 1) and 8 weeks (Stage 2), together with the Global Rating of Change (GROC). The MCIDs were calculated with two anchor-based methods using the GROC as the external criterion. Responsiveness to change for the 5STS was estimated analyzing the correlation with changes in the two comparator instruments and their capacity to discriminate improvement. For the 5STS test, while the MCIDs of the limited community ambulators were similar in the two stages (around 3 s), those of the household ambulators decreased from 1.9 s to 0.72 s. Spearman’s rho coefficients showed an acceptable correlation between changes in 5STS and changes for both the FAC and gait speed changes in both stages of recovery. Our study revealed that the 5STS is responsive to functional changes in patients with stroke and that their degree of severity and stage of recovery influence the MCID values of the 5STS.

          Related collections

          Most cited references30

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          A Short Physical Performance Battery Assessing Lower Extremity Function: Association With Self-Reported Disability and Prediction of Mortality and Nursing Home Admission

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes.

            The objective of this review is to summarize recommendations on methods for evaluating responsiveness and minimal important difference (MID) for patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures. We review, summarize, and integrate information on issues and methods for evaluating responsiveness and determining MID estimates for PRO measures. Recommendations are made on best-practice methods for evaluating responsiveness and MID. The MID for a PRO instrument is not an immutable characteristic, but may vary by population and context, and no one MID may be valid for all study applications. MID estimates should be based on multiple approaches and triangulation of methods. Anchor-based methods applying various relevant patient-rated, clinician-rated, and disease-specific variables provide primary and meaningful estimates of an instrument's MID. Results for the PRO measures from clinical trials can also provide insight into observed effects based on treatment comparisons and should be used to help determine MID. Distribution-based methods can support estimates from anchor-based approaches and can be used in situations where anchor-based estimates are unavailable. We recommend that the MID is based primarily on relevant patient-based and clinical anchors, with clinical trial experience used to further inform understanding of MID.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Meaningful change and responsiveness in common physical performance measures in older adults.

              To estimate the magnitude of small meaningful and substantial individual change in physical performance measures and evaluate their responsiveness. Secondary data analyses using distribution- and anchor-based methods to determine meaningful change. Secondary analysis of data from an observational study and clinical trials of community-dwelling older people and subacute stroke survivors. Older adults with mobility disabilities in a strength training trial (n=100), subacute stroke survivors in an intervention trial (n=100), and a prospective cohort of community-dwelling older people (n=492). Gait speed, Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB), 6-minute-walk distance (6MWD), and self-reported mobility. Most small meaningful change estimates ranged from 0.04 to 0.06 m/s for gait speed, 0.27 to 0.55 points for SPPB, and 19 to 22 m for 6MWD. Most substantial change estimates ranged from 0.08 to 0.14 m/s for gait speed, 0.99 to 1.34 points for SPPB, and 47 to 49 m for 6MWD. Based on responsiveness indices, per-group sample sizes for clinical trials ranged from 13 to 42 for substantial change and 71 to 161 for small meaningful change. Best initial estimates of small meaningful change are near 0.05 m/s for gait speed, 0.5 points for SPPB, and 20 m for 6MWD and of substantial change are near 0.10 m/s for gait speed, 1.0 point for SPPB, and 50 m for 6MWD. For clinical use, substantial change in these measures and small change in gait speed and 6MWD, but not SPPB, are detectable. For research use, these measures yield feasible sample sizes for detecting meaningful change.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Academic Editor
                Journal
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                Int J Environ Res Public Health
                ijerph
                International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
                MDPI
                1661-7827
                1660-4601
                26 February 2021
                March 2021
                : 18
                : 5
                : 2314
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Physical Therapy, University of Valencia, 46010 Valencia, Spain; rodrigo.martin@ 123456uv.es
                [2 ]Department of Rehabilitation, Jerez Hospital, 11407 Jerez de la Frontera, Spain; mjcriso@ 123456gmail.com
                [3 ]Department of Physical Therapy, University of Murcia, 30100 Murcia, Spain; mirapeix@ 123456um.es
                Author notes
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8201-0189
                Article
                ijerph-18-02314
                10.3390/ijerph18052314
                7967692
                33652864
                536eeaf1-8f40-463b-b277-5e0f924569b8
                © 2021 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 28 January 2021
                : 23 February 2021
                Categories
                Article

                Public health
                5sts,stroke,mcid,responsiveness,stages,severity level,gait speed,fac
                Public health
                5sts, stroke, mcid, responsiveness, stages, severity level, gait speed, fac

                Comments

                Comment on this article