The reliability and validity of the Timed Up and Go test in patients ongoing or following lumbar spine surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Fatih Özden
{"title":"The reliability and validity of the Timed Up and Go test in patients ongoing or following lumbar spine surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis","authors":"Fatih Özden","doi":"10.1186/s41983-024-00805-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"No other systematic review examined the measurement properties of the TUG in LSS. The present systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the measurement properties of the Timed Up and Go (TUG) in patients with Lumbar Spine Surgery (LSS). A literature search yielded 906 studies [PubMed:71, Web of Science (WoS):80, Scopus:214, ScienceDirect:471 and Cochrane Library:70]. Included 10 studies were assessed for risk of bias and quality using the “four-point COSMIN tool” and “COSMIN quality criteria tool”. Criterion validity and responsiveness results were pooled with “correlation coefficient” and “Hedges’ g” based effect size, respectively. The correlation coefficient pooling between TUG and VAS back and leg pain was 0.26 (moderate) (95% CI 0.19–0.34) and 0.28 (moderate) (95% CI 0.20–0.36). The pooled coefficient of TUG with ODI and RMDI was 0.33 (moderate) (95% CI 0.27–0.39) and 0.33 (moderate) (95% CI 0.24–0.42), respectively. Besides, TUG has correlated with the quality-of-life PROMs with a coefficient of − 0.22 to − 0.26 (moderate) (EQ5D Index 95% CI − 0.35 to − 0.16), (SF12-PCS 95% CI − 0.33 to − 0.15) and (SF12-MCS 95% CI − 0.32 to − 0.13). The pooled coefficient of TUG with COMI, ZCQ-PF and ZCQ-SS was 0.46 (moderate) (95% CI 0.30–0.59), 0.43 (moderate) (95% CI 0.26–0.56), and 0.38 (moderate) (95% CI 0.21–0.52), respectively. TUG’s 3-day and 6-week responsiveness results were 0.14 (low) (95% CI − 0.02 to 0.29) and 0.74 (moderate to strong) (95% CI 0.60–0.89), respectively. TUG was responsive at the mid-term (6 weeks) follow-up. In clinical practice, the TUG can be used as a reliable, valid and responsive tool to assess LSS patients’ general status, especially in mid-term.","PeriodicalId":74995,"journal":{"name":"The Egyptian journal of neurology, psychiatry and neurosurgery","volume":"2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Egyptian journal of neurology, psychiatry and neurosurgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41983-024-00805-z","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

No other systematic review examined the measurement properties of the TUG in LSS. The present systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the measurement properties of the Timed Up and Go (TUG) in patients with Lumbar Spine Surgery (LSS). A literature search yielded 906 studies [PubMed:71, Web of Science (WoS):80, Scopus:214, ScienceDirect:471 and Cochrane Library:70]. Included 10 studies were assessed for risk of bias and quality using the “four-point COSMIN tool” and “COSMIN quality criteria tool”. Criterion validity and responsiveness results were pooled with “correlation coefficient” and “Hedges’ g” based effect size, respectively. The correlation coefficient pooling between TUG and VAS back and leg pain was 0.26 (moderate) (95% CI 0.19–0.34) and 0.28 (moderate) (95% CI 0.20–0.36). The pooled coefficient of TUG with ODI and RMDI was 0.33 (moderate) (95% CI 0.27–0.39) and 0.33 (moderate) (95% CI 0.24–0.42), respectively. Besides, TUG has correlated with the quality-of-life PROMs with a coefficient of − 0.22 to − 0.26 (moderate) (EQ5D Index 95% CI − 0.35 to − 0.16), (SF12-PCS 95% CI − 0.33 to − 0.15) and (SF12-MCS 95% CI − 0.32 to − 0.13). The pooled coefficient of TUG with COMI, ZCQ-PF and ZCQ-SS was 0.46 (moderate) (95% CI 0.30–0.59), 0.43 (moderate) (95% CI 0.26–0.56), and 0.38 (moderate) (95% CI 0.21–0.52), respectively. TUG’s 3-day and 6-week responsiveness results were 0.14 (low) (95% CI − 0.02 to 0.29) and 0.74 (moderate to strong) (95% CI 0.60–0.89), respectively. TUG was responsive at the mid-term (6 weeks) follow-up. In clinical practice, the TUG can be used as a reliable, valid and responsive tool to assess LSS patients’ general status, especially in mid-term.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
腰椎手术中或手术后患者的定时起立行走测试的可靠性和有效性:系统综述与荟萃分析
目前还没有其他系统综述对腰椎手术患者的 TUG 测量特性进行研究。本系统综述和荟萃分析旨在研究腰椎手术(LSS)患者的定时起立行走(TUG)测量特性。文献检索共获得 906 项研究[PubMed:71、Web of Science (WoS):80、Scopus:214、ScienceDirect:471 和 Cochrane Library:70]。采用 "四点 COSMIN 工具 "和 "COSMIN 质量标准工具 "对纳入的 10 项研究进行了偏倚风险和质量评估。标准有效性和反应性结果分别以 "相关系数 "和 "Hedges'g "效应大小为基础进行汇总。TUG 与 VAS 背痛和腿痛之间的相关系数分别为 0.26(中等)(95% CI 0.19-0.34)和 0.28(中等)(95% CI 0.20-0.36)。TUG与ODI和RMDI的集合系数分别为0.33(中度)(95% CI 0.27-0.39)和0.33(中度)(95% CI 0.24-0.42)。此外,TUG 与生活质量 PROMs 的相关系数为 - 0.22 至 - 0.26(中度)(EQ5D 指数 95% CI - 0.35 至 - 0.16)、(SF12-PCS 95% CI - 0.33 至 - 0.15)和(SF12-MCS 95% CI - 0.32 至 - 0.13)。TUG与COMI、ZCQ-PF和ZCQ-SS的集合系数分别为0.46(中等)(95% CI 0.30-0.59)、0.43(中等)(95% CI 0.26-0.56)和0.38(中等)(95% CI 0.21-0.52)。TUG 3 天和 6 周的反应性结果分别为 0.14(低)(95% CI - 0.02 至 0.29)和 0.74(中度至强)(95% CI 0.60 至 0.89)。TUG在中期(6周)随访时反应良好。在临床实践中,TUG可作为一种可靠、有效且反应灵敏的工具来评估LSS患者的一般状况,尤其是在中期。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Risk factors for hypoechoic carotid plaque in healthy physical-examination population Unveiling the hidden connections: network analysis of depressive symptoms, internet addiction, and attachment in Chinese children and adolescents Neuropsychiatric comorbidities in adult patients with new-onset epilepsy Optimizing the pterional approach in medial sphenoid wing meningioma: a detailed morphometric study on anterior clinoidectomy and its effect on operability score Neuropsychiatric manifestations of hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 during the second wave in Egypt
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1