Manderoos S1,2,3, Vaara M4, Mäki J2, Mälkiä E5, Aunola S6, Karppi S-L7
1The University of Helsinki, Department of General Practice and Primary Health Care, Helsinki, Finland, 2The National Institute for Health and Welfare, Department of Public Health Solutions, Turku, Finland, 3The Folkhälsan Research Center, Helsinki, Finland, 4The National Institute for Health and Welfare, Department of Government Services, Turku, Finland, 5The University of Jyväskylä, Department of Health Sciences, Jyväskylä, Finland, 6The National Institute for Health and Welfare, Department of Welfare, Turku, Finland, 7The Social Insurance Institution, Research Department, Turku, Finland
Background: Processing available visual, vestibular and somatosensory information is integral to modifying ongoing movements to execute independently and safely activities of daily living. The latest studies have reported that agility requires more cognitive processes than muscle strength in young athletes. No previous study has reported measuring comprehensively the capacity of agility among untrained adults. That is why we developed a new agility test (ATA). ATA has been suggested to demand multiple-choice cognitive task including for example sidestepping movements using one foot or both feet.
Purpose: To evaluate relative and absolute reliability of ATA in untrained adults.
Methods: Twenty-five women and twenty-five men, aged 28-55 years, completed the study. Participants had to jump through 10.5 long track consisting twenty-five marks as fast as possible without errors. On the first test day, ATA was executed 3 times and a week later following 3 times to measure 1-week reliability. Thirty minutes later, participants executed 3 successive times for same-day reliability. The best time(s) of 3 executed was used for analyses, except all 3 for reliability coefficients (ICC intraclass correlation coefficient; CI confidence interval; SEM standard error of measurement; CV coefficient of variation; SWC smallest worthwhile change). Minimal detectable change (MDC95) at the 95% confidence interval was determined.
Results: ICC coefficients ranging from 0.91 to 0.95 and the narrow range in CIs indicated good relative reliability of ATA for women and men. SEM values showed that execution times of ATA were stable both of short and long intervals. Because SEM was lower than SWC, sensitivity of ATA could be determined 'good' in 1-week comparison. Same-day analysis showed that sensitivity was 'marginal' for women and 'good' for men. CV coefficients in the same-day execution times of ATA fulfilled the demand of the reliability margin of 5.0% in women (4.78%) and men (4.27%) but those for 1-week interval nearly attained this margin (5.98% and 5.02%, respectively). MDC95 ranged from 0.56s (1-week) to 0.76s (same-day) in women, and 0.51s-0.37s in men, respectively.
Conclusion(s): ATA test is reliable and stable method of evaluating the capacity of agility among untrained adult people.
Implications: Comprehensive agility test which is fast to execute and does not require special devices, is reliable method for the physiotherapists´ use. It is challenging enough also for fit people and ATA does not include ceiling effect. Further, unlike other tests of physical functioning in the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) domains, ATA can be considered an appropriate method of screening early signs of declined agility and giving tips for planning suitable exercises focused on improving or maintaining capacity of agility and preventing clumsiness.
Keywords: Multiple-choice cognitive task, Physical functioning, Reproducibility
Funding acknowledgements: This study received financial support from Finnish Margaretha Foundation, Finnish People's Cultural Foundation and Finnish Folkhälsan Research Center.
Purpose: To evaluate relative and absolute reliability of ATA in untrained adults.
Methods: Twenty-five women and twenty-five men, aged 28-55 years, completed the study. Participants had to jump through 10.5 long track consisting twenty-five marks as fast as possible without errors. On the first test day, ATA was executed 3 times and a week later following 3 times to measure 1-week reliability. Thirty minutes later, participants executed 3 successive times for same-day reliability. The best time(s) of 3 executed was used for analyses, except all 3 for reliability coefficients (ICC intraclass correlation coefficient; CI confidence interval; SEM standard error of measurement; CV coefficient of variation; SWC smallest worthwhile change). Minimal detectable change (MDC95) at the 95% confidence interval was determined.
Results: ICC coefficients ranging from 0.91 to 0.95 and the narrow range in CIs indicated good relative reliability of ATA for women and men. SEM values showed that execution times of ATA were stable both of short and long intervals. Because SEM was lower than SWC, sensitivity of ATA could be determined 'good' in 1-week comparison. Same-day analysis showed that sensitivity was 'marginal' for women and 'good' for men. CV coefficients in the same-day execution times of ATA fulfilled the demand of the reliability margin of 5.0% in women (4.78%) and men (4.27%) but those for 1-week interval nearly attained this margin (5.98% and 5.02%, respectively). MDC95 ranged from 0.56s (1-week) to 0.76s (same-day) in women, and 0.51s-0.37s in men, respectively.
Conclusion(s): ATA test is reliable and stable method of evaluating the capacity of agility among untrained adult people.
Implications: Comprehensive agility test which is fast to execute and does not require special devices, is reliable method for the physiotherapists´ use. It is challenging enough also for fit people and ATA does not include ceiling effect. Further, unlike other tests of physical functioning in the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) domains, ATA can be considered an appropriate method of screening early signs of declined agility and giving tips for planning suitable exercises focused on improving or maintaining capacity of agility and preventing clumsiness.
Keywords: Multiple-choice cognitive task, Physical functioning, Reproducibility
Funding acknowledgements: This study received financial support from Finnish Margaretha Foundation, Finnish People's Cultural Foundation and Finnish Folkhälsan Research Center.
Topic: Human movement analysis; Musculoskeletal: lower limb
Ethics approval required: Yes
Institution: the Social Insurance Institution in Finland
Ethics committee: the Ethical Committee of the Research and Development Centre
Ethics number: The decision has not included the number.
All authors, affiliations and abstracts have been published as submitted.
