ArticleMultidisciplinary respiratory medicine2020
Reference value for the six-minute peg board and ring test. A cross sectional study.
Article in Multidisciplinary respiratory medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIn our daily life, arm activities, whether supported or unsupported play a major role. Both simple and complex activities require the muscles, namely trapezius, pectoralis minor, scalene, and intercostals, to participate in arm positioning. These muscles also enact as the accessory respiratory muscles. Therefore, arm elevation increases the load on these muscles and they fail to perform dual activities, resulting in arm fatigue and a feeling of dyspnoea in healthy individuals as well as in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients. Various upper limb exercise tests were designed to measure this impairment, one of them being the six-minute peg board and ring test. The aim of the study is to derive a reference value for the six-minute peg board and ring test among healthy Indian population (Mangalore) from the age of 20-70 years of either gender. Also, to find a correlation among the number of rings and body mass index, arm length, arm and forearm circumference, the strength of shoulder and elbow flexors-extensors, grip strength of both sides and level of physical activity.
methodsParticipants performed two tests, thirty minutes apart. They were asked to load as many rings as possible in 6 minutes. Arm length, arm and forearm circumference were measured with a measuring tape. Shoulder and elbow flexors-extensors were assessed using a handheld push-pull dynamometer. Grip strength was measured with the Jamar hand-held dynamometer. Level of physical activity was assessed using International Physical Activity Questionnairelong form.
resultsThe samples consisted of 450 healthy individuals between the age of 20-70 years. Reference values for each age group for both genders were reported. We found that age was correlated with the six-minute peg board and ring test score (
conclusionIn this study, we derived a reference value for the six-minute peg board and ring test. There was a correlation among age, strength variables and the number of rings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.