Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30674278›Full record

Trial reportBMC geriatrics2019

Reliability of mobility measures in older medical patients with cognitive impairment.

Tobias Braun, Christian Thiel, Ralf-Joachim Schulz, Christian Grüneberg

Abstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC geriatrics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Observational
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Tobias BraunDepartment of Applied Health Sciences, Division of Physiotherapy, Hochschule für Gesundheit (University of Applied Sciences), Gesundheitscampus 6-8, 44801, Bochum, Germany. tobias.braun@hs-gesundheit.de.ORCID 0000-0002-8851-2574
Christian ThielDepartment of Applied Health Sciences, Division of Physiotherapy, Hochschule für Gesundheit (University of Applied Sciences), Gesundheitscampus 6-8, 44801, Bochum, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-4507-8787
Ralf-Joachim SchulzDepartment of Geriatric Medicine, St. Marien-Hospital, Kunibertskloster 11-13, 50668, Cologne, Germany.
Christian GrünebergDepartment of Applied Health Sciences, Division of Physiotherapy, Hochschule für Gesundheit (University of Applied Sciences), Gesundheitscampus 6-8, 44801, Bochum, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-8870-8457

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMobility is a key indicator of physical functioning in older people, but there is limited evidence of the reliability of mobility measures in older people with cognitive impairment. This study aimed to examine the test-retest reliability and measurement error of common measurement instruments of mobility and physical functioning in older patients with dementia, delirium or other cognitive impairment.

methodsA cross-sectional study was performed in a geriatric hospital. Older acute medical patients with cognitive impairment, indicated by a Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score of ≤24 points, were assessed twice within 1 day by a trained physiotherapist. The following instruments were applied: de Morton Mobility Index, Hierarchical Assessment of Balance and Mobility, Performance-Oriented Mobility Assessment, Short Physical Performance Battery, 4-m gait speed, 5-times chair rise test, 2-min walk test, timed up and go test, Barthel Index mobility subscale and Functional Ambulation Categories. As appropriate, the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), Cohen's kappa, standard error of measurement, limits of agreement and minimal detectable change (MDC) values were estimated.

resultsSixty-five older acute medical patients with cognitive impairment participated in the study (mean age: 82 ± 7 years; mean MMSE: 20 ± 4, range: 10 to 24 points). Some participants were physically or cognitively unable to perform the gait speed (46%), 2-min walk (46%), timed up and go (51%) and chair rise (75%) tests. ICC and kappa values were above 0.9 in all instruments except for the gait speed (ICC = 0.86) and chair rise (ICC = 0.72) measures. Measurement error is reported for each instrument. The absolute limits of agreement ranged from 11% (de Morton Mobility Index and Hierarchical Assessment of Balance and Mobility) to 35% (chair rise test).

conclusionsThe test-retest reliability is sufficient (> 0.7) for group-comparisons in all examined instruments. Most mobility measurements have limited use for individual monitoring of mobility over time in older hospital patients with cognitive impairment because of the large measurement error (> 20% of scale width), even though relative reliability estimations seem sufficient (> 0.9) for this purpose.

trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register ( DRKS00005591 ). Registered 2 February 2015.

Indexed as

Mobility LimitationAgedAged, 80 and overCognitive DysfunctionCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHealth Services for the AgedHumansMaleMiddle AgedPatient AdmissionPhysical Therapy ModalitiesPostural BalanceReproducibility of ResultsWalkingWalking SpeedCognitive impairmentDementiaLimits of agreementMeasurement errorMinimal detectable changeMobility limitationOlder peopleOutcome measureReliability

Identifiers

PMID30674278
PMCPMC6343264

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.