Raatz B1, Dewar R1, Allinson G2, Hannah S3, Johnston L1
1The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia, 2The University of Queensland, School of Health & Rehabilitation Sciences, Brisbane, Australia, 3St Peters Lutheran College, Brisbane, Australia
Background: Developmental Coordination Disorder (DCD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder which is present in 5-6% of children. Poor postural control is thought to contribute strongly to these motor coordination difficulties. Sound assessment of postural control has been limited by assessments that do not have adequate psychometric data. Research is needed to establish the reliability of a common test of postural control: the 'Timed Up and Go'.
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate intra-rater and test-retest reproducibility of the Timed-Up-and-Go (TUG) standard and dual-task subtests in children with and without coordination difficulties.
Methods: Children were recruited for intra-rater (n=28, age 7-12 years) and test-retest (n=21, age 4-6 years) reproducibility evaluation of the TUG-standard, TUG-motor and TUG-cognitive. Motor function was quantified with the Test of Gross Motor Development (TGMD-2). Reproducibility was examined by reliability and agreement. Reliability of raw scores was examined using Intra-class Correlation Coefficients. Agreement of category scores for the TUG-standard and TUG-cognitive was examined using exact agreement, kappa, limits of agreement and smallest detectable change.
Results: Performance on all TUG subtests improved with age. Reliability of the TUG subtests was good-excellent (ICC = 0.63-0.86) for all intra-rater and test-retest analyses, except intra-rater reliability of TUG-cognitive (ICC=0.44). For all subtests, data from Trial-2 showed better reliability than Trial-1 or Trial-average. Both the TUG-standard and TUG-cognitive showed excellent agreement (Kappa = 0.77-1.0).
Conclusion(s): This study provides new data on the reproducibility of the original TUG protocol and its motor and cognitive subtests for children. All three TUG subtests are reproducible clinical tools for children aged 4-12 years. During assessment, children should be provided with one practice turn, then the results of their second trial recorded. Further research is required to complete normative data for school-aged children 4-12 years and examine performance in other paediatric populations.
Implications: The TUG-standard and its subtests the TUG-motor and TUG-cognitive can be recommended to physiotherapists for assessment of dynamic balance during gait in school aged children.
Keywords: Paediatrics, Postural Control, Motor Coordination
Funding acknowledgements: Nil
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate intra-rater and test-retest reproducibility of the Timed-Up-and-Go (TUG) standard and dual-task subtests in children with and without coordination difficulties.
Methods: Children were recruited for intra-rater (n=28, age 7-12 years) and test-retest (n=21, age 4-6 years) reproducibility evaluation of the TUG-standard, TUG-motor and TUG-cognitive. Motor function was quantified with the Test of Gross Motor Development (TGMD-2). Reproducibility was examined by reliability and agreement. Reliability of raw scores was examined using Intra-class Correlation Coefficients. Agreement of category scores for the TUG-standard and TUG-cognitive was examined using exact agreement, kappa, limits of agreement and smallest detectable change.
Results: Performance on all TUG subtests improved with age. Reliability of the TUG subtests was good-excellent (ICC = 0.63-0.86) for all intra-rater and test-retest analyses, except intra-rater reliability of TUG-cognitive (ICC=0.44). For all subtests, data from Trial-2 showed better reliability than Trial-1 or Trial-average. Both the TUG-standard and TUG-cognitive showed excellent agreement (Kappa = 0.77-1.0).
Conclusion(s): This study provides new data on the reproducibility of the original TUG protocol and its motor and cognitive subtests for children. All three TUG subtests are reproducible clinical tools for children aged 4-12 years. During assessment, children should be provided with one practice turn, then the results of their second trial recorded. Further research is required to complete normative data for school-aged children 4-12 years and examine performance in other paediatric populations.
Implications: The TUG-standard and its subtests the TUG-motor and TUG-cognitive can be recommended to physiotherapists for assessment of dynamic balance during gait in school aged children.
Keywords: Paediatrics, Postural Control, Motor Coordination
Funding acknowledgements: Nil
Topic: Paediatrics
Ethics approval required: Yes
Institution: The University of Queensland
Ethics committee: Human Research Ethics Committee
Ethics number: NHMRC EC00456
All authors, affiliations and abstracts have been published as submitted.
