Validity and reliability of a simple ‘low-tech’ test for measuring choice stepping reaction time in older people

Objective: To establish the psychometric properties of a simple ‘low-tech’ choice stepping reaction time test (CSRT-M) by investigating its validity and test–retest reliability. Design: Cross-sectional. Setting: Community. Subjects: A total of 169 older people from the control arm of a clinical tria...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Clinical rehabilitation 2016-11, Vol.30 (11), p.1128-1135
Main Authors: Delbaere, K, Gschwind, YJ, Sherrington, C, Barraclough, E, Garrués-Irisarri, MA, Lord, SR
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Accidental Falls - prevention & control
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Choice Behavior
Clinical research
Clinical trials
Cognitive functioning
Confidence intervals
Cross-Sectional Studies
Deviation
Discriminant validity
Exercise Test - methods
Falls
Female
Geriatric Assessment - methods
Humans
Independent Living
Logistic Models
Male
Medical screening
Motor ability
Multivariate Analysis
Older people
Postural Balance
Predictive validity
Predictive Value of Tests
Quadriceps
Quantitative psychology
Reaction Time
Reliability
Risk assessment
Risk factors
Rubber
Sensation Disorders - diagnosis
Suffering
Test-Retest reliability
Unplanned
Validation studies
Validity
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Objective: To establish the psychometric properties of a simple ‘low-tech’ choice stepping reaction time test (CSRT-M) by investigating its validity and test–retest reliability. Design: Cross-sectional. Setting: Community. Subjects: A total of 169 older people from the control arm of a clinical trial and a convenience sample of 30 older people. Main measures: Demographic, physical, cognitive and prospective falls data were collected in addition to CSRT-M. The CSRT-M time was taken as the total time to complete 20 steps onto four targets printed on a portable rubber mat. Assessment of the original electronic version (CSRT-E) and re-administration of the CSRT-M the next day was done in 30 participants. Results: Multivariate regression analysis showed that the CSRT-M time was best explained by leaning balance control, quadriceps strength and cognitive functioning (R2 = 0.44). Performance on the CSRT-M was worse in older participants and participants with a presence of fall risk factors, supporting good discriminant validity. The odds of suffering multiple future falls increased by 74% (odds ratio (OR) = 1.74, 95% CI (confidence interval) = 1.14–2.65, p = 0.010) for each standard deviation increase in CSRT-M, supporting good predictive validity. Criterion validity was confirmed by a strong bivariate correlation between CSRT-M and CSRT-E (0.81, p 
ISSN:0269-2155
1477-0873
DOI:10.1177/0269215515613422