Abstract

To investigate the reliability and construct and criterion- related validities of the Timed “Up and Go” Assessment of Biomechanical Strategies (TUG-ABS), when used with subjects with hemiparesis due to stroke within clinical settings. Construct validity was investigated by the following methods: the known groups, convergence, discriminant analyses, and the opinions of clinical professionals, who used the TUG-ABS with subjects with stroke. The criterion-related validity was investigated by comparing the realtime and video observation scores. Inter-rater reliability was investigated by two independent examiners using both realtime and video observations. The TUG-ABS differentiated people with stroke from healthy controls (p < 0.001), was correlated with the time spent to perform the TUG (rs = –0.85; p < 0.001), and correctly classified 98% of the subjects with stroke (p < 0.001). In addition, all of the clinicians who used the TUG-ABS in their clinical settings, provided positive evaluations. Agreement was also observed between real-time and video observations (0.27 ≤ kappa ≤ 0.85; p < 0.01). Furthermore, the TUG-ABS was reliable for both real-time (0.24 ≤ kappa ≤ 1.00; p < 0.05) and video observations (0.15 ≤ kappa ≤ 0.94; p < 0.05). The TUG-ABS demonstrated good construct and criterion-related validities, as well as reliability, when applied in subjects with stroke within clinical settings, which supported the theoretical assumptions employed for its development.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call