Reliability in Novel Field-Based Fitness Measurements and Postexercise Scores from a Physical Fitness Test Battery in Older Adults

Abstract

Introduction: Physical fitness is strongly associated with daily physical function, health, and longevity in older adults. Field-based tests may provide a reasonable alternative compared to advanced laboratory testing. Separating postexercise test scores from reactivity measurements requires sufficient test-retest reliability. Postexercise test scores with reliability analyses of field-based fitness tests in older adults are lacking. The present study aimed to examine the test-retest reliability of some novel easily accommodated fitness test measurements and compare pretest scores with postexercise results in these tests along with other field-based fitness tests in older adults. Methods: Totally 1,407 community-dwelling older adults (69% female), x̄ = 71.5 ± 5.0 (65–84 years), performed twelve field-based fitness tests at pretest 1, pretest 2 and a posttest after an 8-week exercise period (twice weekly 1 h of combined strength and aerobic training). T tests, intra-class correlation, limits of agreement, standard error of measurement, and coefficient of variance were performed between pre-1 and pre-2 tests, and repeated measures ANOVA and partial eta squared effect size for postexercise differences for men and women in 5-year age groups ranging from 65 to 84 years. Results: Between pre-1 and pre-2 tests a significant difference was noted in some of the novel fitness test measurements but generally not, e.g., in isometric trunk flexion and step-up height on either leg among all sex and age groups. In most of these novel fitness test measurements, no significant differences occurred between the two pretests. Examples of results from the pre-2 test to the posttest were isometric trunk flexion 45° endurance and isometric trunk extension endurance improved significantly for both sexes in age groups 65–74 years. Women, but not men, improved the maximal step-up height for both legs in most age groups. The speed in the 50 sit-to-stand improved significantly for most age groups in both sexes. Six-min walk distance improved significantly for most age groups in women but among men only in 65–69 years. In the timed-up-and-go test, significant improvements were seen for all age groups in women and in men 70–79 years. No postexercise improvements were generally observed for grip strength or balance. Conclusions: In most of the novel fitness test measures, no significant difference was noted between the two pretests in the assessed sex and age groups. Results after the 8-week exercise period varied between sex and age groups, with significant improvements in several of the twelve studied fitness tests. These findings may be valuable for future projects utilizing easily accommodated physical fitness tests in older adults.