Between-site equivalence of turning speed assessments using inertial measurement units.
Lucy Parrington, Laurie A King, Margaret M Weightman and 4 others
PMID 34530311WHAT IT FOUND
Turning speed measured by sensors was equivalent across two sites for 6 of 21 outcomes.
A custom clinical turning course showed the most consistency, while a one-minute walk test showed none. Site differences in environment may affect head and trunk measurements more than pelvis.
Key findings
01Equivalence between sites was found for 6 of 21 turning outcomes, with the custom clinical turning course showing the most consistent results.
02The one-minute walk test did not show significant equivalence between sites for head, trunk, or pelvis angular rates.
03Pelvis angular rate was more equivalent between sites than head or trunk rates, possibly due to differences in visual environments.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The study used a small sample of healthy young adults (mean age ~30-35), so results may not apply to older adults or clinical populations with balance impairments. Differences in floor surface, lighting, and researcher placement between sites were not fully controlled, which may have affected the results. The equivalence tests relied on a specific small effect size threshold (~10-13 deg/s); using a larger threshold would have resulted in more outcomes being classified as equivalent. Participants used varying turning techniques during the one-minute walk test, which increased variability and may have hindered equivalence.
Declared interests
The authors declared no conflicts of interest. The study was supported by U.S. Government funding (Non-P.H.S.).
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume that all turning assessments are equally reliable across different clinics. The one-minute walk test failed to show equivalence between sites, meaning data from this task may not be comparable if collected in different environments or by different staff.