Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41921127›Full record

ArticleJMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies2026

Reliability and Discriminant Ability of an Instrumented Timed Up and Go Test in People With Postsurgical Orthopedic Conditions: Quantitative Study.

Marica Giardini, Ilaria Arcolin, Valerio Antonio Arcobelli, Michela Picardi, Sabato Mellone, Marco Godi

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JMIR rehabilitation and assistive technologies, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

6 authors.

Marica GiardiniDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Institute of Veruno, Istituti Clinici Scientifici Maugeri IRCCS, Gattico-Veruno, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8910-2649
Ilaria ArcolinDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Institute of Veruno, Istituti Clinici Scientifici Maugeri IRCCS, Gattico-Veruno, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5948-2428
Valerio Antonio ArcobelliDepartment of Electrical, Electronic, and Information Engineering-Guglielmo Marconi (DEI), University of Bologna, Viale del Risorgimento 2, Bologna, 40136, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1262-9899
Michela PicardiDepartment of Neurorehabilitation Sciences, Casa di Cura Igea, Milano, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7996-1530
Sabato MelloneDepartment of Electrical, Electronic, and Information Engineering-Guglielmo Marconi (DEI), University of Bologna, Viale del Risorgimento 2, Bologna, 40136, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7688-0188
Marco GodiDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Institute of Veruno, Istituti Clinici Scientifici Maugeri IRCCS, Gattico-Veruno, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8501-6524

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The Timed Up and Go (TUG) test is widely used to assess mobility and fall risk in older adults and orthopedic patients. Its instrumented variant (iTUG), based on inertial measurement units, enables an objective quantification of motor performance and can even be implemented using smartphone technology. However, its broader clinical adoption remains limited by concerns about reliability, feasibility, and the interpretability of the extracted parameters. Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the test-retest reliability of variables derived from a single-sensor iTUG in orthopedic inpatients undergoing rehabilitation and to determine whether a subset of reliable sensor-based metrics can support a multidimensional assessment of functional mobility and discriminate among common orthopedic conditions. Methods: We recruited 104 inpatients at discharge from a rehabilitation ward after total hip arthroplasty, total knee arthroplasty, or femur fracture. Each participant performed the iTUG test on 2 consecutive days using a smartphone-based solution consisting of an inertial measurement unit placed on the lower back. From 100 extracted variables, those with excellent test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient ≥0.75) were retained. Exploratory factor analysis was used to identify underlying mobility domains, and linear discriminant analysis with 10-fold cross-validation tested their ability to classify diagnostic groups. Results: Out of 100 iTUG-derived variables, 36 demonstrated excellent test-retest reliability, and 25 were retained for multivariate analysis. Exploratory factor analysis identified 5 factors-walking ability, pace or rhythm, sit-to-walk smoothness, turning ability, and mediolateral angular stability-explaining 80.8% of the total variance. These factors showed good classification accuracy (68%) and achieved an area under the curve of 0.86 and an overall mean accuracy of 0.68 (SD 0.14) for distinguishing among total hip arthroplasty, total knee arthroplasty, and femur fracture. In contrast, total iTUG duration alone yielded an area under the curve of 0.62. All patients used walking aids, and gait variables were more reliable than jerk-based or coordination metrics. Conclusions: The single-sensor iTUG provides reliable and clinically informative metrics that go beyond traditional stopwatch timing, enabling a multidimensional view of functional mobility in orthopedic patients. The approach is feasible, interpretable, and compatible with real-world mobile health apps, supporting personalized rehabilitation monitoring and future integration into digital decision support systems.

Indexed as

IMUinertial measurement unitinstrumented Timed Up and GoiTUG testorthopedic patientreliabilitywearable sensor

Identifiers

PMID41921127
PMCPMC13043016

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.