Consistency and test–retest reliability of stepping tests designed to measure self-perceived and actual physical stepping ability in older adults

Research output: Contribution to JournalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Background: Older adults with an incorrect perception of their physical abilities may fall more often, suggesting a need for tests to quantify self-perceived and actual abilities. Aims: To determine between-test consistency and test–retest reliability of three tests that measure self-perceived and actual stepping ability in older adults. Methods: Older adults performed three stepping tests, covering high (bar test) and far steps (river and step tests). We studied between-test consistency in the perceived ability and actual ability of 269 participants at each task and in the difference between these two (degree of misjudgment). We also studied test–retest reliability in 21 participants. Results: Perceived ability showed moderate consistency (r = 0.46–0.55, p < 0.001) and moderate-to-strong reliability [ICC(2,1) = 0.42–0.63, p < 0.03] for all tests. Actual ability showed strong consistency (r = 0.77, p < 0.001) and strong-to-excellent reliability [ICC(2,1) = 0.68–0.93, p < 0.001]. Degree of misjudgment was weakly consistent between two stepping far tests (r = 0.32, p < 0.001), but not consistent between stepping far and high tests (r = 0.05 and 0.06, p > 0.3). Test–retest reliability of the degree of misjudgment was poor-to-moderate [ICC(2,1) = 0.38 and 0.50, p < 0.05 on the two stepping far tests and ICC(2,1) = − 0.08, p = 0.63 on the stepping high test]. Conclusions: Actual and perceived ability can be consistently and reliably measured across tests, whereas the degree of misjudgment is less reliable and consistent within individuals.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1-9
Number of pages9
JournalAging Clinical and Experimental Research
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 16 Jan 2019

Fingerprint

Aptitude
Exercise Test
Rivers

Keywords

  • Accidental falls
  • Aged
  • Motor performance
  • Self efficacy

Cite this

@article{ebe74242b28e49789d3930d44b0bdb96,
title = "Consistency and test–retest reliability of stepping tests designed to measure self-perceived and actual physical stepping ability in older adults",
abstract = "Background: Older adults with an incorrect perception of their physical abilities may fall more often, suggesting a need for tests to quantify self-perceived and actual abilities. Aims: To determine between-test consistency and test–retest reliability of three tests that measure self-perceived and actual stepping ability in older adults. Methods: Older adults performed three stepping tests, covering high (bar test) and far steps (river and step tests). We studied between-test consistency in the perceived ability and actual ability of 269 participants at each task and in the difference between these two (degree of misjudgment). We also studied test–retest reliability in 21 participants. Results: Perceived ability showed moderate consistency (r = 0.46–0.55, p < 0.001) and moderate-to-strong reliability [ICC(2,1) = 0.42–0.63, p < 0.03] for all tests. Actual ability showed strong consistency (r = 0.77, p < 0.001) and strong-to-excellent reliability [ICC(2,1) = 0.68–0.93, p < 0.001]. Degree of misjudgment was weakly consistent between two stepping far tests (r = 0.32, p < 0.001), but not consistent between stepping far and high tests (r = 0.05 and 0.06, p > 0.3). Test–retest reliability of the degree of misjudgment was poor-to-moderate [ICC(2,1) = 0.38 and 0.50, p < 0.05 on the two stepping far tests and ICC(2,1) = − 0.08, p = 0.63 on the stepping high test]. Conclusions: Actual and perceived ability can be consistently and reliably measured across tests, whereas the degree of misjudgment is less reliable and consistent within individuals.",
keywords = "Accidental falls, Aged, Motor performance, Self efficacy",
author = "Weijer, {R. H.A.} and Hoozemans, {M. J.M.} and {van Die{\"e}n}, {J. H.} and M. Pijnappels",
year = "2019",
month = "1",
day = "16",
doi = "10.1007/s40520-018-01112-3",
language = "English",
pages = "1--9",
journal = "Aging - Clinical and Experimental Research",
issn = "1594-0667",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Consistency and test–retest reliability of stepping tests designed to measure self-perceived and actual physical stepping ability in older adults

AU - Weijer, R. H.A.

AU - Hoozemans, M. J.M.

AU - van Dieën, J. H.

AU - Pijnappels, M.

PY - 2019/1/16

Y1 - 2019/1/16

N2 - Background: Older adults with an incorrect perception of their physical abilities may fall more often, suggesting a need for tests to quantify self-perceived and actual abilities. Aims: To determine between-test consistency and test–retest reliability of three tests that measure self-perceived and actual stepping ability in older adults. Methods: Older adults performed three stepping tests, covering high (bar test) and far steps (river and step tests). We studied between-test consistency in the perceived ability and actual ability of 269 participants at each task and in the difference between these two (degree of misjudgment). We also studied test–retest reliability in 21 participants. Results: Perceived ability showed moderate consistency (r = 0.46–0.55, p < 0.001) and moderate-to-strong reliability [ICC(2,1) = 0.42–0.63, p < 0.03] for all tests. Actual ability showed strong consistency (r = 0.77, p < 0.001) and strong-to-excellent reliability [ICC(2,1) = 0.68–0.93, p < 0.001]. Degree of misjudgment was weakly consistent between two stepping far tests (r = 0.32, p < 0.001), but not consistent between stepping far and high tests (r = 0.05 and 0.06, p > 0.3). Test–retest reliability of the degree of misjudgment was poor-to-moderate [ICC(2,1) = 0.38 and 0.50, p < 0.05 on the two stepping far tests and ICC(2,1) = − 0.08, p = 0.63 on the stepping high test]. Conclusions: Actual and perceived ability can be consistently and reliably measured across tests, whereas the degree of misjudgment is less reliable and consistent within individuals.

AB - Background: Older adults with an incorrect perception of their physical abilities may fall more often, suggesting a need for tests to quantify self-perceived and actual abilities. Aims: To determine between-test consistency and test–retest reliability of three tests that measure self-perceived and actual stepping ability in older adults. Methods: Older adults performed three stepping tests, covering high (bar test) and far steps (river and step tests). We studied between-test consistency in the perceived ability and actual ability of 269 participants at each task and in the difference between these two (degree of misjudgment). We also studied test–retest reliability in 21 participants. Results: Perceived ability showed moderate consistency (r = 0.46–0.55, p < 0.001) and moderate-to-strong reliability [ICC(2,1) = 0.42–0.63, p < 0.03] for all tests. Actual ability showed strong consistency (r = 0.77, p < 0.001) and strong-to-excellent reliability [ICC(2,1) = 0.68–0.93, p < 0.001]. Degree of misjudgment was weakly consistent between two stepping far tests (r = 0.32, p < 0.001), but not consistent between stepping far and high tests (r = 0.05 and 0.06, p > 0.3). Test–retest reliability of the degree of misjudgment was poor-to-moderate [ICC(2,1) = 0.38 and 0.50, p < 0.05 on the two stepping far tests and ICC(2,1) = − 0.08, p = 0.63 on the stepping high test]. Conclusions: Actual and perceived ability can be consistently and reliably measured across tests, whereas the degree of misjudgment is less reliable and consistent within individuals.

KW - Accidental falls

KW - Aged

KW - Motor performance

KW - Self efficacy

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85060150448&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85060150448&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s40520-018-01112-3

DO - 10.1007/s40520-018-01112-3

M3 - Article

SP - 1

EP - 9

JO - Aging - Clinical and Experimental Research

JF - Aging - Clinical and Experimental Research

SN - 1594-0667

ER -