Assessing Timed Up and Go in Parkinson’s disease: Reliability and validity of Timed Up and Go Assessment of biomechanical strategies

Silva, Bruna Adriana da; Faria, Christina Danielli Coelho de Morais; Santos, Mariana Palla; Swarowsky, Alessandra

doi:10.2340/16501977-2254

Cited by 28 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The titles and abstracts were screened using the inclusion criteria and 46 studies were selected. After reading the full text of these articles, 24 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review (Bergström et al, 2012;Claesson et al, 2017;Da Silva et al, 2017;Dal Bello-Haas et al, 2011;Duncan et al, 2017;Falvo and Earhart, 2009;Foreman et al, 2011;Franchignoni et al, 2005;Huang et al, 2011;Johnston et al, 2013;Kleiner et al, 2018;Kobayashi et al, 2017;Lim et al, 2005;Mariani et al, 2013;Morris et al, 2001;Nilsson and Hagell, 2009;Schlenstedt et al,. 2015;Shine et al, 2012;Spagnuolo et al, 2018;Van Lummel et al, 2016;Verheyden et al, 2014;Vogler et al, 2015;Zhan et al, 2018).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…And lastly, it should be noted that there are other nomenclatures used for the TUG as in the case of Lim et al (2005) , who call it Timed Get Up and Go test. Technological tools were also used to implement the TUG test and these tests are referred to as inertial Timed Up and Go (iTUG) and assessment of biomechanical strategies-TUG, as in Salarian et al (2010) , Shine et al (2012) , and Da Silva et al (2017) . In order to perform the iTUG, Salarian et al (2010) used 7 inertial sensors (accelerometer and gyroscope) connected to each other and placed on the forearms, thighs, legs, and sternum, while Shine et al (2012) recorded a video of the test performed on a taped box, instead of a cone, like in Da Silva et al (2017) , who also used a video camera.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The UPDRS scale (describe symptomatology of patients) has also been used to analyse construct validity of the TUG, where Schlenstedt et al (2015), observed "weak" scores while Verheyden et al (2014), Da Silva et al (2017), and Kobayashi et al (2017), noted "moderate" scores. In view of the results, the TUG presents a high construct validity when we compare it with the motor dimension of the scale (UPDRS III), however, this validity is reduced when compared with the total score of the UPDRS scale.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Evaluation of the psychometric properties and clinical applications of the Timed Up and Go test in Parkinson disease: a systematic review

Mollinedo¹,

Cancela²

2020

J Exerc Rehabil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To review and systematically summarize the psychometric and clinical properties (reliability, validity, responsiveness) of the Timed Up and Go test applied to persons diagnosed with Parkinson disease. A systematic review was performed by screening four scientific databases (MED-LINE, CINAHL, and PubMed). Independent reviewers selected and extracted data from articles that assessed the reliability, validity, sensitivity to change, and/or clinical properties of the Timed Up and Go test in persons with Parkinson disease. Twenty-four studies were selected. Nine analyzed reliability and yielded "good" to "moderate" scores. Seventeen used a range of different contrast tests to assess validity of the Timed Up and Go test and found "good" quality scores in those that assessed balance. Only two studies analyzed sensitivity to change and they reported "poor" quality scores. The use of Timed Up and Go in Parkinson disease patients presents good reliability and validity (when compared to tests that assess balance).

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Evaluation of the psychometric properties and clinical applications of the Timed Up and Go test in Parkinson disease: a systematic review

Mollinedo¹,

Cancela²

2020

J Exerc Rehabil

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The combined use of these two components demonstrated good concurrent validity when compared with the mDGI. ImDGI was also strongly associated with the TUG test, which is used widely to detect dynamic balance impairments …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Instrumented Version of the Modified Dynamic Gait Index in Patients With Neurologic Disorders

Anastasi

Carpinella

Gervasoni

et al. 2019

PM&R

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Gait instability is common in adults with neurologic disorders and the modified Dynamic Gait Index (mDGI) was recently introduced to assess dynamic balance. However, instrumental assessment is needed to provide quantitative measures. Objective: To develop and validate an instrumented version of the mDGI. Design: Cross-sectional study. Setting: Clinical setting. Participants: Thirty adults with neurologic disorders (10 with multiple sclerosis, 10 with Parkinson disease, and 10 with stroke) and 20 healthy volunteers. Methods: Participants were assessed with the Timed Up and Go test (TUG) and with the mDGI. During the assessment of mDGI, data were collected by a single Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) positioned on the sternum. Principal component analysis (PCA) was performed on the instrumented data extracting eight PC scores (ImPC) describing dynamic balance. The instrumented overall score (ImDGI) was then calculated as the sum of the mPCs. PCA revealed two components associated with stride features and regularity (ImDGI_Gait_Pattern) and trunk movements (ImDGI_Trunk_Sway). Spearman coefficients were calculated between mDGI and ImDGI, whereas Mann-Whitney (U) and Kruskal-Wallis (H) tests assessed differences between groups and neurologic conditions. Main Outcome Measurements: ImDGI. Results: ImDGI did not show ceiling effects, and good correlations were found between ImDGI and mDGI (r = .84), and TUG (r = .84) for people with neurologic disorders (P < .001). Significant differences among pathologies (H test (2) =12.5, P = .002) and between healthy participants and adults with neurologic disorders (U test = 47.0, P = .001) were found. ImDGI_Trunk_Sway discriminated between people using or not using walking aids and among the three pathologies (H (2) = 10.0, P = .007). Conclusions:The ImDGI test seems to provide valid measures to objectively assess dynamic balance in neurologic conditions and possibly quantify balance deficits also in adults with neurologic disorders.

show abstract

“…Basic functional mobility will be assessed with the TUG test, providing the time required to rise from a chair, walk 3 m at a comfortable pace, turn, return to the chair and sit down [ 55 ]. In the present study, participants will complete a practice trial first.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on gait in people with Parkinson’s disease: study protocol for a randomized, controlled clinical trial

Alizad

Meinzer

Frossard

et al. 2018

Trials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundGait difficulties are common and frequently devastating to people with Parkinson’s disease (PD). These difficulties are often followed by an increased risk of falls, leading to injury, hospitalization and mortality. The dysfunction in the basal ganglia-thalamocortical motor circuits and reduced activity in the premotor and primary motor cortices has raised interest in transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) as an adjunct intervention in PD. tDCS might provide a potentially safe and non-invasive treatment by modulating cortical excitability and behavioural outcomes. The aim of this study is to compare the effects of different monopolar and bipolar montages of tDCS administered to the motor cortex and cerebellum on gait speed in PD.MethodsThis study will be conducted in a randomized, double-blind cross-over design. Eighteen participants diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease will receive anodal and sham tDCS (1 mA, 20 min, 10 × 4 cm2) over the premotor and primary motor cortices with the cathode over the cerebellum during treadmill walking. Three montages will be applied over three sessions and compared: anodal tDCS with a small active cathode (4 × 4 cm2); anodal tDCS with a large, functionally inert cathode (10 × 10 cm2); and sham tDCS. The primary outcome measure is gait speed, and secondary outcome measures include gait parameters (temporospatial, segmental, kinematic), the Timed Up and Go test and lower limb muscle activity patterns as measured by electromyography.DiscussionThis study will investigate the short-term effects of anodal tDCS over the premotor and primary motor cortices on gait abilities using monopolar and bipolar montages in people with PD. The outcomes will inform future studies aimed at inducing longer-lasting changes in neural excitability and performance using multisession tDCS designs in PD.Trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR), ACTRN12618000063213. Registered on 17 January 2018. Retrospectively registered. Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s13063-018-2982-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Assessing Timed Up and Go in Parkinson’s disease: Reliability and validity of Timed Up and Go Assessment of biomechanical strategies

Abstract: TUG-ABS presented adequate measurement properties in individuals with Parkinson's disease.

Cited by 28 publications

References 25 publications

Evaluation of the psychometric properties and clinical applications of the Timed Up and Go test in Parkinson disease: a systematic review

Evaluation of the psychometric properties and clinical applications of the Timed Up and Go test in Parkinson disease: a systematic review

Instrumented Version of the Modified Dynamic Gait Index in Patients With Neurologic Disorders

Effects of transcranial direct current stimulation on gait in people with Parkinson’s disease: study protocol for a randomized, controlled clinical trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About