Cyntia R J A de Baptista, Amanda M Vicente, Mariana A Souza, Juliana Cardoso, Vanessa M Ramalho, Ana C Mattiello-Sverzut
{"title":"典型发育儿童10米步行测验方法及其信度影响。","authors":"Cyntia R J A de Baptista, Amanda M Vicente, Mariana A Souza, Juliana Cardoso, Vanessa M Ramalho, Ana C Mattiello-Sverzut","doi":"10.1155/2020/4209812","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Research and clinical settings use the 10-meter walk test (10MWT) to measure locomotor capacity with considerable methodological diversity. Comparison between healthy and disabled children is frequent; however, the reproducibility of 10MWT using different methods is unknown.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study analysed intrasubject, test-retest reliability, and agreement of four methods of 10MWT, exploring the influence of pace, acceleration-deceleration phases, and anthropometric measurements when calculating mean velocity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cross-sectional study evaluated 120 typical children, both sexes, aged 6, 8, 10, and 12 (<i>n</i> = 30 for each age). The mean times and velocities of the path (10 m) and middle path (6 m) obtained at a self-selected and fast pace were analysed. Initial assessment and another after seven days recorded three measurements per method (sV6 = self-selected pace and 6 m; sV10 = self-selected pace and 10 m; fV6 = fast pace and 6 m; fV10 = fast pace and 10 m). Interclass correlation coefficient (ICC), multiple regression, and Snedecor-F test (5% significance level) were used.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The fV10 method had high intrasubject reliability for all tested ages (0.70 < ICC > 0.89); sV10 exhibited high intrasubject reliability for ages 6, 8, and 12 (0.70 < ICC > 0.89) and moderate for age 10 (0.50 < ICC < 0.69).Test-retest reliability at sV6 and fV6 did not reach high ICC in any tested ages. The test-retest reliability at sV10 and fV10 was moderate for ages 6, 8, and 12 (0.50 < ICC > 0.69) and poor for age 10 (0.25 < ICC > 0.49). There was no agreement between methods: sV6 versus sV10 (mean difference = 0.91 m/s; SEM = 0.036); fV6 versus fV10 (mean difference = 1.70; SEM = 0.046). The fV6 method versus fV10 overestimated the velocity (bias = 1.70 m/s).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>For typical children, the method that ensured the highest intrasubject reliability used fast pace and 10 m. Moreover, test-retest reliability increased when adopting 10 m at both self-selected and fast pace. The methods were not equivalent but were related, and those that did not compute the entire pathway overestimated the results.</p>","PeriodicalId":45585,"journal":{"name":"Rehabilitation Research and Practice","volume":"2020 ","pages":"4209812"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2020/4209812","citationCount":"15","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Methods of 10-Meter Walk Test and Repercussions for Reliability Obtained in Typically Developing Children.\",\"authors\":\"Cyntia R J A de Baptista, Amanda M Vicente, Mariana A Souza, Juliana Cardoso, Vanessa M Ramalho, Ana C Mattiello-Sverzut\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/2020/4209812\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Research and clinical settings use the 10-meter walk test (10MWT) to measure locomotor capacity with considerable methodological diversity. Comparison between healthy and disabled children is frequent; however, the reproducibility of 10MWT using different methods is unknown.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study analysed intrasubject, test-retest reliability, and agreement of four methods of 10MWT, exploring the influence of pace, acceleration-deceleration phases, and anthropometric measurements when calculating mean velocity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cross-sectional study evaluated 120 typical children, both sexes, aged 6, 8, 10, and 12 (<i>n</i> = 30 for each age). The mean times and velocities of the path (10 m) and middle path (6 m) obtained at a self-selected and fast pace were analysed. Initial assessment and another after seven days recorded three measurements per method (sV6 = self-selected pace and 6 m; sV10 = self-selected pace and 10 m; fV6 = fast pace and 6 m; fV10 = fast pace and 10 m). Interclass correlation coefficient (ICC), multiple regression, and Snedecor-F test (5% significance level) were used.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The fV10 method had high intrasubject reliability for all tested ages (0.70 < ICC > 0.89); sV10 exhibited high intrasubject reliability for ages 6, 8, and 12 (0.70 < ICC > 0.89) and moderate for age 10 (0.50 < ICC < 0.69).Test-retest reliability at sV6 and fV6 did not reach high ICC in any tested ages. The test-retest reliability at sV10 and fV10 was moderate for ages 6, 8, and 12 (0.50 < ICC > 0.69) and poor for age 10 (0.25 < ICC > 0.49). There was no agreement between methods: sV6 versus sV10 (mean difference = 0.91 m/s; SEM = 0.036); fV6 versus fV10 (mean difference = 1.70; SEM = 0.046). The fV6 method versus fV10 overestimated the velocity (bias = 1.70 m/s).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>For typical children, the method that ensured the highest intrasubject reliability used fast pace and 10 m. Moreover, test-retest reliability increased when adopting 10 m at both self-selected and fast pace. The methods were not equivalent but were related, and those that did not compute the entire pathway overestimated the results.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45585,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Rehabilitation Research and Practice\",\"volume\":\"2020 \",\"pages\":\"4209812\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-08-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2020/4209812\",\"citationCount\":\"15\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Rehabilitation Research and Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/4209812\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2020/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rehabilitation Research and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/4209812","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2020/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
Methods of 10-Meter Walk Test and Repercussions for Reliability Obtained in Typically Developing Children.
Introduction: Research and clinical settings use the 10-meter walk test (10MWT) to measure locomotor capacity with considerable methodological diversity. Comparison between healthy and disabled children is frequent; however, the reproducibility of 10MWT using different methods is unknown.
Objectives: This study analysed intrasubject, test-retest reliability, and agreement of four methods of 10MWT, exploring the influence of pace, acceleration-deceleration phases, and anthropometric measurements when calculating mean velocity.
Methods: This cross-sectional study evaluated 120 typical children, both sexes, aged 6, 8, 10, and 12 (n = 30 for each age). The mean times and velocities of the path (10 m) and middle path (6 m) obtained at a self-selected and fast pace were analysed. Initial assessment and another after seven days recorded three measurements per method (sV6 = self-selected pace and 6 m; sV10 = self-selected pace and 10 m; fV6 = fast pace and 6 m; fV10 = fast pace and 10 m). Interclass correlation coefficient (ICC), multiple regression, and Snedecor-F test (5% significance level) were used.
Results: The fV10 method had high intrasubject reliability for all tested ages (0.70 < ICC > 0.89); sV10 exhibited high intrasubject reliability for ages 6, 8, and 12 (0.70 < ICC > 0.89) and moderate for age 10 (0.50 < ICC < 0.69).Test-retest reliability at sV6 and fV6 did not reach high ICC in any tested ages. The test-retest reliability at sV10 and fV10 was moderate for ages 6, 8, and 12 (0.50 < ICC > 0.69) and poor for age 10 (0.25 < ICC > 0.49). There was no agreement between methods: sV6 versus sV10 (mean difference = 0.91 m/s; SEM = 0.036); fV6 versus fV10 (mean difference = 1.70; SEM = 0.046). The fV6 method versus fV10 overestimated the velocity (bias = 1.70 m/s).
Conclusions: For typical children, the method that ensured the highest intrasubject reliability used fast pace and 10 m. Moreover, test-retest reliability increased when adopting 10 m at both self-selected and fast pace. The methods were not equivalent but were related, and those that did not compute the entire pathway overestimated the results.
期刊介绍:
Rehabilitation Research and Practice is a peer-reviewed, Open Access journal that publishes original research articles, review articles, and clinical studies in all areas of physical medicine and rehabilitation. The journal focuses on improving and restoring functional ability and quality of life to those with physical impairments or disabilities. In addition, articles looking at techniques to assess and study disabling conditions will be considered.