Abstract
Objectives. To investigate the effect of two foot placements (normal or posterior placement) and three arm positions (hands on the thighs, arms crossed over chest, and augmented arm position with elbow extended) on the five times sit-to-stand (FTSTS) test times of individuals with chronic stroke. Design. Cross-sectional study. Setting. University-based rehabilitation clinic. Participants. A convenience sample of community-dwelling individuals with chronic stroke (N = 45). Methods. The times in completing the FTSTS with two foot placements and the three arm positions were recorded by stopwatch. Results. Posterior foot placement led to significantly shorter FTSTS times when compared with normal foot placement in all the 3 arm positions (P ≤ 0.001). In addition, hands on thigh position led to significantly longer FTSTS times than the augmented arm position (P = 0.014). Conclusion. Our results showed that foot placement and arm position could influence the FTSTS times of individuals with chronic stroke. Standardizing the foot placement and arm position in the test procedure is essential, if FTSTS test is intended to be used repeatedly on the same subject.
Highlights
Stroke is a common cause of impaired mobility and disability in daily activity [1,2,3]
The objectives of the present study were to investigate the effect of (1) 2 foot placements and (2) 3 arm positions on the five times sit-to-stand (FTSTS) times of individuals with chronic stroke
Two-way repeated measures ANOVA revealed no significant interaction between foot placement and arm position on the FTSTS times [F(2, 88) = 0.632, P = 0.534]
Summary
Stroke is a common cause of impaired mobility and disability in daily activity [1,2,3]. In order to document the severity of impairment and to monitor progress in the course of rehabilitation, different outcome measures have been developed. The five times sit-to-stand (FTSTS) test was designed by Csuka and McCarty in 1985 [5]. The FTSTS is an outcome measure commonly used in stroke rehabilitation [6,7,8,9,10,11]. Good test-retest reliability has been reported with healthy subjects of different ages [12, 13]. Mong and colleagues demonstrated that the FTSTS times had good reliability under their adopted protocol [6], the testing procedures of FTSTS were not well standardized across different clinical studies
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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
