{"title":"Reliability and validity of the L test in people with multiple sclerosis","authors":"Kader Eldemir , Sefa Eldemir , Cagla Ozkul , Ceyla Irkec , Arzu Guclu-Gunduz","doi":"10.1016/j.physio.2024.101429","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objectives</h3><div>Functional mobility is an essential factor affecting the activities of daily living in people with multiple sclerosis (PwMS). The L test is a comprehensive assessment tool for functional mobility that incorporates sit-to-stand, transfers and bidirectional turning. The purpose of this study was to determine the psychometric properties of the L test in PwMS.</div></div><div><h3>Design</h3><div>Cross-sectional study.</div></div><div><h3>Participants</h3><div>Thirty-four PwMS [Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score 0 to 5] and 34 healthy controls were included in this study.</div></div><div><h3>Main outcome measures</h3><div>The L test was administered along with the timed up and go (TUG) test, 10-m walk test (10-MWT), 6-minute walk test (6-MWT), timed 360 degree turn test, and EDSS by the same rater. Fall history was recorded to categorize PwMS with and without a history of falls. The L test was repeated after 1 week to determine test–retest reliability.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The L test showed excellent test–retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.995). The minimum detectable change for the L test time was 1.4 seconds. The L test demonstrated significant positive correlations with the TUG test, timed 360 degree turn test and EDSS score, and significant negative correlations with the 10-MWT and 6-MWT (<em>P</em> < 0.001). Significant differences in the L test times were found between PwMS and healthy controls, and between PwMS with a history of falls and those without a history of falls (<em>P</em> < 0.05). The cut-off time of 14.7 seconds on the L test was found to best discriminate between PwMS and healthy people, while 16.4 seconds was found to best discriminate between PwMS with a history of falls and those without a history of falls.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>The L test is a reliable and valid tool for the assessment of functional mobility in PwMS.</div></div><div><h3>Clinical Trial Registration number</h3><div><span><span>NCT05641714</span><svg><path></path></svg></span>.</div></div><div><h3>Contribution of the Paper</h3><div><ul><li><span>•</span><span><div>The L test has excellent test–retest reliability and validity in PwMS.</div></span></li><li><span>•</span><span><div>The L test can provide insight into functional mobility, with high scores (long completion times) warranting further specific assessment of underlying components (turning, walking, etc.) that may contribute to the longer completion times.</div></span></li><li><span>•</span><span><div>The L test demonstrates a more comprehensive mobility assessment using an <span>L</span>-shaped pathway.</div></span></li></ul></div></div>","PeriodicalId":54608,"journal":{"name":"Physiotherapy","volume":"126 ","pages":"Article 101429"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physiotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0031940624004383","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives
Functional mobility is an essential factor affecting the activities of daily living in people with multiple sclerosis (PwMS). The L test is a comprehensive assessment tool for functional mobility that incorporates sit-to-stand, transfers and bidirectional turning. The purpose of this study was to determine the psychometric properties of the L test in PwMS.
Design
Cross-sectional study.
Participants
Thirty-four PwMS [Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS) score 0 to 5] and 34 healthy controls were included in this study.
Main outcome measures
The L test was administered along with the timed up and go (TUG) test, 10-m walk test (10-MWT), 6-minute walk test (6-MWT), timed 360 degree turn test, and EDSS by the same rater. Fall history was recorded to categorize PwMS with and without a history of falls. The L test was repeated after 1 week to determine test–retest reliability.
Results
The L test showed excellent test–retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.995). The minimum detectable change for the L test time was 1.4 seconds. The L test demonstrated significant positive correlations with the TUG test, timed 360 degree turn test and EDSS score, and significant negative correlations with the 10-MWT and 6-MWT (P < 0.001). Significant differences in the L test times were found between PwMS and healthy controls, and between PwMS with a history of falls and those without a history of falls (P < 0.05). The cut-off time of 14.7 seconds on the L test was found to best discriminate between PwMS and healthy people, while 16.4 seconds was found to best discriminate between PwMS with a history of falls and those without a history of falls.
Conclusion
The L test is a reliable and valid tool for the assessment of functional mobility in PwMS.
Clinical Trial Registration number
NCT05641714.
Contribution of the Paper
•
The L test has excellent test–retest reliability and validity in PwMS.
•
The L test can provide insight into functional mobility, with high scores (long completion times) warranting further specific assessment of underlying components (turning, walking, etc.) that may contribute to the longer completion times.
•
The L test demonstrates a more comprehensive mobility assessment using an L-shaped pathway.
期刊介绍:
Physiotherapy aims to publish original research and facilitate continuing professional development for physiotherapists and other health professions worldwide. Dedicated to the advancement of physiotherapy through publication of research and scholarly work concerned with, but not limited to, its scientific basis and clinical application, education of practitioners, management of services and policy.
We are pleased to receive articles reporting original scientific research, systematic reviews or meta-analyses, theoretical or debate articles, brief reports and technical reports. All papers should demonstrate methodological rigour.