Concurrent validity and test–retest reliability of VALD ForceDecks' strength, balance, and movement assessment tests

Abstract

ObjectivesTo evaluate the concurrent validity and test–retest reliability of common movement, strength, and balance tests using portable uniaxial dual force plates. DesignRepeated measures cross-sectional study. MethodsSixteen healthy individuals participated in two testing sessions, where they performed 12 different movement, strength, and balance tests. Vertical ground reaction force and centre of pressure data were collected using the VALD ForceDecks simultaneously with ground-embedded laboratory force plates. Concurrent validity was assessed using root mean square error for raw time-series data and Bland–Altman plots for discrete metrics. Test–retest reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients and minimal detectable changes. ResultsForceDecks recorded vertical ground reaction forces and center of pressure with high accuracy compared to laboratory force plates. The mean bias between systems was negligible (<2 N or 0.1 mm), with small limits of agreement (<5 N or 1 mm). Overall, 530/674 (79%) showed good or excellent validity (<10% difference) and 611/773 (79%) had good or excellent reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient >0.75). ForceDecks reliability was similar to laboratory force plates (<0.07 intraclass correlation coefficient median difference for all metrics). ConclusionsPortable uniaxial force plates record highly accurate vertical ground reaction forces and center of pressure during a range of movement, strength, and balance tests. The VALD ForcDecks are a valid and reliable alternative to laboratory force plates when strict standardized testing and data analysis procedures are followed. Users should be aware of the validity and reliability characteristics of the tests and metrics they choose.