Phys Ther Korea 2016; 23(3): 40-47
Published online September 17, 2016
https://doi.org/10.12674/ptk.2016.23.3.040
© Korean Research Society of Physical Therapy
양승례, 오유리, 전예림, 박대성
건양대학교 의과학대학 물리치료학과
Seong-rye Yang, Yu-ri Oh, Ye-rim Jeon, Dae-sung Park, PhD, PT
Dept. of Physical Therapy, College of Medical Science, Konyang University
Correspondence to: 박대성
Assessments of Sit-to-Stand (STS) and gait functions are essential procedures in evaluating level of independence for the patients after stroke. In a previous study, we developed the software to analyze center of pressure (COP) in standing position on Wii Balance Board (WBB). This purpose of this study is to measure test-retest reliability of ground reaction forces, COP and time using WBB on STS and gait in healthy adults. Fifteen healthy participants performed three trials of STS and gait on WBB. The time (s), vertical peak (%) and COP path-length (cm) were measured on both tasks. Additionally, counter (%), different peak (%), symmetry ratio, COP x-range and COP y-range were analyzed on STS, 1st peak (%), 2nd peak (%) of weight were analyzed on gait. Intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), standard error measurement (SEM) and smallest real difference (SRD) were analyzed for test-retest reliability. ICC of all variables except COP path-length appeared to .676~.946 on STS, and to .723~.901 on gait. SEM and SRD of all variables excepting COP path-length appeared .227~8.886, .033~24.575 on STS. SEM and SRD excepting COP path-length appeared about .019~3.933, .054~11.879 on gait. WBB is not only cheaper than force plate, but also easier to use clinically. WBB is considered as an adequate equipment for measuring changes of weight bearing during balance, STS and gait test which are normally used for functional assessment in patients with neurological problems and elderly. The further study is needed concurrent validity on neurological patients, elderly patients using force plate and WBB.Background:
Objects:
Methods:
Results:
Conclusion:
Keywords: Gait, Ground reaction force, Test-retest reliability, Wii balance board.
Phys Ther Korea 2016; 23(3): 40-47
Published online September 17, 2016 https://doi.org/10.12674/ptk.2016.23.3.040
Copyright © Korean Research Society of Physical Therapy.
양승례, 오유리, 전예림, 박대성
건양대학교 의과학대학 물리치료학과
Seong-rye Yang, Yu-ri Oh, Ye-rim Jeon, Dae-sung Park, PhD, PT
Dept. of Physical Therapy, College of Medical Science, Konyang University
Correspondence to:박대성
Assessments of Sit-to-Stand (STS) and gait functions are essential procedures in evaluating level of independence for the patients after stroke. In a previous study, we developed the software to analyze center of pressure (COP) in standing position on Wii Balance Board (WBB). This purpose of this study is to measure test-retest reliability of ground reaction forces, COP and time using WBB on STS and gait in healthy adults. Fifteen healthy participants performed three trials of STS and gait on WBB. The time (s), vertical peak (%) and COP path-length (cm) were measured on both tasks. Additionally, counter (%), different peak (%), symmetry ratio, COP x-range and COP y-range were analyzed on STS, 1st peak (%), 2nd peak (%) of weight were analyzed on gait. Intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), standard error measurement (SEM) and smallest real difference (SRD) were analyzed for test-retest reliability. ICC of all variables except COP path-length appeared to .676~.946 on STS, and to .723~.901 on gait. SEM and SRD of all variables excepting COP path-length appeared .227~8.886, .033~24.575 on STS. SEM and SRD excepting COP path-length appeared about .019~3.933, .054~11.879 on gait. WBB is not only cheaper than force plate, but also easier to use clinically. WBB is considered as an adequate equipment for measuring changes of weight bearing during balance, STS and gait test which are normally used for functional assessment in patients with neurological problems and elderly. The further study is needed concurrent validity on neurological patients, elderly patients using force plate and WBB.Background:
Objects:
Methods:
Results:
Conclusion:
Keywords: Gait, Ground reaction force, Test-retest reliability, Wii balance board.
Experimental set up of sit-to-stand (A) and gait (B).
Ground reaction force of sit-to-stand (left) and gait (right) (A) 1st trial, (B) 2nd trial, (C) 3rd trial.
Table 2 .. Reliability in ground reaction force of sit-to-stand (N=15).
Parameters | Mean±SDa | Mean±SD of 3 trials | ICCb (95% CIc) | SEMd | SRDe | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Trial 1 | Trial 2 | Trial 3 | |||||
Time (s) | 2.11±.53 | 1.92±.23 | 1.89±.36 | 1.97±.40 | .676(.231~.882) | .227 | .629 |
Vertical peak (%) | 114.28±3.73 | 114.35±4.55 | 117.21±6.13 | 115.29±4.99 | .720(.336~.898) | 2.638 | 7.312 |
COPf path-length (cm) | 50.47±18.57 | 45.92±26.30 | 73.40±88.14 | 56.59±54.31 | .294(.676~.743) | 45.632 | 126.493 |
Counter (%) | .05±.04 | .06±.04 | .05±.04 | .05±.04 | .896(.753~.962) | .012 | .033 |
Difference peak (%) | 44.60±26.17 | 45.35±28.74 | 40.04±25.14 | 43.33±26.22 | .897(.756~.963) | 8.415 | 23.326 |
Symmetry ratio | 1.00±.14 | .98±.08 | 1.03±.12 | 1.00±.11 | .758(.426~.912) | .055 | .154 |
X_range (cm) | 15.88±14.94 | 18.28±20.51 | 18.81±24.17 | 17.66±19.81 | .946(.872~.980) | 4.604 | 12.761 |
Y_range (cm) | 23.76±25.85 | 18.24±11.82 | 22.34±20.00 | 21.45±19.74 | .864(.677~.951) | 7.281 | 20.182 |
astandard deviation.
bintra-class correlation coefficient
ccconfidence interval
dstandard error of measurement
esmallest real difference
f. center of pressure..
Table 3 .. Reliability in ground reaction force of gait (N=15).
Parameters | Mean±SDa | Mean±SD of 3 trials | ICCb (95% CIc) | SEMd | SRDe | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Trial 1 | Trial 2 | Trial 3 | |||||
Stance time (s) | .54±.06 | .53±.06 | .53±.07 | .53±.06 | .901(.818~.949) | 0.19 | .054 |
Vertical peak (%) | 112.10±9.46 | 109.97±9.30 | 112.02±7.84 | 111.36±8.92 | .840(.707~.919) | 3.540 | 9.812 |
COPf path-length (cm) | 26.77±4.49 | 27.28±4.23 | 28.25±4.43 | 27.43±4.38 | .458(.676~.743) | 3.224 | 8.936 |
1st Peak (%) | 106.78±9.49 | 104.90±7.84 | 105.66±7.07 | 105.77±8.14 | .723(.491~.859) | 4.186 | 11.879 |
2nd Peak (%) | 109.51±10.59 | 109.12±9.24 | 108.67±12.72 | 109.10±10.82 | .868(.758~.919) | 3.933 | 10.901 |
astandard deviation.
bintra-class correlation coefficient
ccconfidence interval
dstandard error of measurement
esmallest real difference
f. center of pressure..