Validity of Instrumented 360° Turn Test in Older Adults with Cognitive Impairment

Validity and Reliability of the Timed 360° Turn Test in Individuals with Ankle Sprain

Background

The Timed 360° turn test (T-360° TT) was developed to assess balance and turning ability. Although validity and reliability have been performed in different diseases, validity and reliability have not been performed in individuals with ankle sprain (AS).

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to investigate the validity and reliability of the T-360° TT in individuals with AS.

Methods

The study included 54 individuals with AS. Participants were initially evaluated with T-360° TT, Timed Up and Go (TUG) test and Biodex Balance System (BBS). To assess test-retest reliability, the T-360° TT was performed again 5 days after the first measurement by the same assessor.

Results

At the end of the study, strong positive correlations were found between T-360° TT with TUG test and BBS (p < 0.05). In addition, T-360° TT had excellent test-retest reliability (Intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.87).

Conclusion

The T-360° TT is a valid and reliable tool for the evaluation of balance and turning ability in individuals with AS. We also think that it can be used practically in clinical settings because it is a test that can be easily and quickly performed.

The test-retest reliability and concurrent validity of 360° turn test in patients with knee osteoarthritis

PURPOSE

The aim of this study is to determine whether the 360° turn test is a reliable and valid evaluator that can be used to assess dynamic balance in patients with early (radiographic grades I and II) and advanced (radiographic grades III and IV) knee osteoarthritis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study is a methodological research. For the test time and step count of 360° turn test; test-retest reliability were determined by calculating the intraclass correlation coefficient and concurrent validity in patients with knee osteoarthritis was investigated by correlation with the timed up and go test time.

RESULTS

The final analysis was made on 117 participants. The intraclass correlation coefficient values for the test time and step count of 360° turn test in patients with early knee osteoarthritis are 0.931 and 0.902, respectively, while they are 0.923 and 0.943 in patients with advanced knee osteoarthritis. The Pearson correlation coefficients between the time and step count of 360° turn test and the test time of the timed up and go test in patients with early knee osteoarthritis, respectively; while they are 0.547 and 0.388, the correlation in patients with advanced knee osteoarthritis are 0.697 and 0.700, respectively (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The 360° turn test is a evaluator that has excellent test-retest reliability and moderate to strong concurrent validity in patients with both early and advanced knee osteoarthritis and can be used in the assessment of dynamic balance in this population.

Beyond timing and step counting in 360° turning-in-place assessment: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Turning in place is a challenging motor task and is used as a brief assessment test of lower limb function and dynamic balance. This review aims to examine how research of instrumented analysis of turning in place is implemented. In addition to reporting the studied population, we covered acquisition systems, turn detection methods, quantitative parameters, and how these parameters are computed.

METHODS

Following the development of a rigorous search strategy, the Web of Science and Scopus were systematically searched for studies involving the use of turning-in-place. From the selected articles, the study population, types of instruments used, turn detection method, and how the turning-in-place characteristics were calculated.

RESULTS

Twenty-one papers met the inclusion criteria. The subject groups involved in the reviewed studies included young, middle-aged, and older adults, stroke, multiple sclerosis and Parkinson's disease patients. Inertial measurement units (16 studies) and motion camera systems (5 studies) were employed for gathering measurement data, force platforms were rarely used (2 studies). Two studies used commercial software for turn detection, six studies referenced previously published algorithms, two studies developed a custom detector, and eight studies did not provide any details about the turn detection method. The most frequently used parameters were mean angular velocity (14 cases, 7 studies), turn duration (13 cases, 13 studies), peak angular velocity (8 cases, 8 studies), jerkiness (6 cases, 5 studies) and freezing-of-gait ratios (5 cases, 5 studies). Angular velocities were derived from sensors placed on the lower back (7 cases, 4 studies), trunk (4 cases, 2 studies), and shank (2 cases, 1 study). The rest (9 cases, 8 studies) did not report sensor placement. Calculation of the freezing-of-gait ratio was based on the acceleration of the lower limbs in all cases. Jerkiness computation employed acceleration in the medio-lateral (4 cases) and antero-posterior (1 case) direction. One study did not reported any details about jerkiness computation.

CONCLUSION

This review identified the capabilities of turning-in-place assessment in identifying movement differences between the various subject groups. The results, based on data acquired by inertial measurement units across studies, are comparable. A more in-depth analysis of tests developed for gait, which has been adopted in turning-in-place, is needed to examine their validity and accuracy.