Dataset Information

Construct validity and reliability of the 2-Minute Step Test (2MST) in individuals with low back pain.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Functional tests are important clinical tools, since they are non-invasive methods, with simple applicability, and low cost. However, there are few tests adapted for individuals with chronic low back pain. Thus, our objective was to evaluate the test-retest and inter-rater reliability of the 2-Minute Step Test in individuals with chronic low back pain and to correlate the test score with measures of pain and physical activity.

Methods

We included patients aged between 18 and 45 years, of both sexes, and with low back pain. The interval between the test and retest was 7 days. We analyzed the data via intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC), confidence interval at 95%, standard error of measurement, and minimum detectable change for reliability. We used the Spearman's correlation coefficient to verify the correlation between 2-Minute Step Test and measures of pain and physical activity (Numerical Pain Scale, Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire, Pain-Related Catastrophizing Thoughts Scale, Tampa Scale of Kinesiophobia, and Baecke Habitual Physical Activity Questionnaire).

Results

Sample is composed of 37 individuals, most of them female, with overweight and low back pain > 60 months. 2-Minute Step Test showed excellent test-retest (ICC = 0.903) and inter-rater (ICC = 0.925) reliability. Sport domain of the Baecke showed a significant correlation with the 2-Minute Step Test (rho = 0.444).

Conclusion

2-Minute Step Test is a reliable measure to measure the functional capacity of patients with chronic low back pain considering different times and examiners, as well as being positively correlated with sports practice.

SUBMITTER: de Jesus SFC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9721032 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Construct validity and reliability of the 2-Minute Step Test (2MST) in individuals with low back pain.

de Jesus Sulamizia Filomena Costa SFC Bassi-Dibai Daniela D Pontes-Silva André A da Silva de Araujo Aliny A de Freitas Faria Silva Silvana S Veneroso Christiano Eduardo CE de Paula Gomes Cid André Fidelis CAF Dibai-Filho Almir Vieira AV

BMC musculoskeletal disorders 20221205 1

<h4>Background</h4>Functional tests are important clinical tools, since they are non-invasive methods, with simple applicability, and low cost. However, there are few tests adapted for individuals with chronic low back pain. Thus, our objective was to evaluate the test-retest and inter-rater reliability of the 2-Minute Step Test in individuals with chronic low back pain and to correlate the test score with measures of pain and physical activity.<h4>Methods</h4>We included patients aged between 1 ...[more]

PMID: 36471309

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCurrently, there are no outcome measures assessing the ability of people with non-specific low back pain to self-manage their illness. Inspired by the 'Patient Enablement Instrument', we developed the Patient Enablement Instrument for Back Pain (PEI-BP). The aim of this study was to describe the development of the Patient Enablement Instrument for Back Pain (PEI-BP) and investigate content validity, construct validity, internal consistency, test-retest reliability, measurement error, responsiveness and floor and ceiling effects.MethodsThe PEI-BP consists of 6 items that are rated on a 0-10 Numeric Rating Scale. Measurement properties were evaluated using the COSMIN taxonomy and were based on three cohorts from primary care with low back pain: The content validity cohort (N = 14) which participated in semi-structured interviews, the GLA:D® Back cohort (N = 272) and the test-retest cohort (N = 37) which both completed self-reported questionnaires. For construct validity and responsiveness, enablement was compared to disability (Oswestry Disability Index), back pain beliefs (Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire), fear avoidance (Fear-Avoidance Beliefs Questionnaire-physical activity), mental health (SF-36), educational level and number of previous episodes of low back pain.ResultsThe PEI-BP was found to have acceptable content validity, construct validity, reliability (internal consistency, test-retest reliability and measurement error) and responsiveness. The Smallest Detectable Change was 10.1 points illustrating that a patient would have to change more than 1/6 of the scale range for it to be a true change. A skewed distribution towards the high scores were found at baseline indicating a potentially problematic ceiling effect in the current population.ConclusionsThe PEI-BP can be considered a valid and reliable tool to measure enablement on people seeking care for non-specific LBP. Further testing of the PEI-BP in populations with more severe LBP is recommended.Trial registrationNot applicable.

Project description:BACKGROUND CONTEXT:The US National Pain Strategy focused attention on high-impact chronic pain and its restrictions. Although many interventions have been studied for chronic low-back pain, results are typically reported for heterogeneous samples. To better understand chronic pain and target interventions to those who most need care, more granular classifications recognizing chronic pain's impact are needed. PURPOSE:To test whether chronic pain impact levels can be identified in chronic low-back pain clinical trial samples, examine the baseline patient mix across studies, and evaluate the construct validity of high-impact chronic pain. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING:Descriptive analyses using 12 large study datasets. PATIENT SAMPLES:Chronic low-back pain patients in nonsurgical, nonpharmacologic trials in the US, Canada, and UK. OUTCOME MEASURES:Preference-based health utilities from the SF-6D and EQ-5D, employment status and absenteeism. METHODS:We used two logistic regression models to predict whether patients had high-impact chronic pain and whether the remainder had low- or moderate-impact chronic pain. We developed these models using two datasets. Models with the best predictive power were used to impute impact levels for six other datasets. Stratified by these estimated chronic pain impact levels, we characterized the case mix of patients at baseline in each dataset, and summarized their health-utilities and work productivity. This study was funded by a National Center for Complementary and Integrative Medicine grant. The authors have no potential conflicts of interest. RESULTS:The logistic models had excellent predictive power to identify those with high-impact chronic pain. Although studies were all of chronic low-back pain patients, the baseline mix of patients varied widely. Across all datasets, utilities, and productivity were similar for those with high-impact chronic pain and worsened as chronic pain impact increased. CONCLUSIONS:There is a need to better categorize chronic pain patients to allow the targeting of optimal interventions for those with each level of chronic pain impact.

Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the convergent validity of the six-minute stepper test (6MST) with the variables used in the diagnosis of sarcopenia (appendicular muscle mass, handgrip strength and six-meter gait speed test), as well as to evaluate test-retest reliability and safety when applied to hospitalized elderly patients. Finally, we aimed to compare the performance in the 6MST between hospitalized elderly patients and healthy elderly from the community.Materials and methodsObservational and cross-sectional study. Elderly patients admitted to a private hospital and healthy elderly from the community were recruited. On the first day, the patients included underwent the following assessments: anthropometric, handgrip strength (HGS), six-meter gait speed test (6GST) and 6MST. On the second day, before breakfast, patients underwent body composition assessment. The healthy elderly were evaluated on a single day and performed only anthropometric assessment and 6MST.Results30 hospitalized patients (age 71.0±7.9 years) and 15 healthy elderly (age 68.1±5.8 years) were included. There was a high correlation of 6MST with 6GST (r = 0.78; p<0.001), moderate correlation with HGS (r = 0.59; p<0.001) and low correlation with appendicular muscle mass (r = 0.45; p = 0.01). There was no statistical difference between the first and second 6MST performed by hospitalized elderly (196.2±91.0 cycles vs. 191.3±103.7 cycles; p = 0.66), in addition to an excellent agreement between these measures (ICC = 0.90; 95% IC 0.78-0.95). Only one adverse event (3.3%) occurred in the sample.Conclusion6MST showed convergent validity with the functional variables used in the diagnosis of sarcopenia. In addition, excellent test-retest reliability was observed, which indicates the need for a single assessment in hospitalized elderly patients. The prevalence of adverse events during the application of the test is low, without resulting in clinical symptoms; therefore, the test is considered safe for this population. In addition, hospitalized elderly patients perform worse in the 6MST compared to healthy elderly from the community.

Dataset Information

Construct validity and reliability of the 2-Minute Step Test (2MST) in individuals with low back pain.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Construct validity and reliability of the 2-Minute Step Test (2MST) in individuals with low back pain.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets