Establishing the Reliability of The Step Test Evaluation of Performance on Stairs (STEPS) in Multiple Sclerosis.
Patrick G Monaghan, Ana M Daugherty, Nora E Fritz
PMID 38588968WHAT IT FOUND
In adults with relapse-remitting MS, a 5-minute stair test scored consistently by therapists and tracked with walking tests and processing speed.
Higher scores related to more active minutes later, but the small sample limits certainty.
Key findings
01The total STEPS score showed excellent agreement among raters and when the same raters re-scored videos one week later.
02STEPS scores were significantly related to walking assessments and to the symbol digits modalities test, but not to the trail-making tests.
03STEPS scores were significantly related to very active minutes at 3 and 6 months, while relationships with total step counts were not statistically significant.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs
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
Only people with relapse-remitting MS were studied, so results do not show how STEPS performs in other MS subtypes. The analysed sample was small: 21 participants after two missing STEPS records, and the authors note larger, more diverse samples are needed for the validation analyses. All testing occurred in one session, and repeated live testing was not feasible because of fatigue and symptom variability. Participants had to be able to ambulate with or without an assistive device more than 50% of the time, so findings may not apply to people with MS who cannot walk most of the time. STEPS measures stair performance only; it does not capture stair use history, frequency, or confidence.
Declared interests
The authors report no conflict of interest. No funding source is stated.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read STEPS as a fall-risk test or as proof that stair training will increase activity. The study showed scoring agreement and correlations in 21 analysed participants who could ambulate with or without a device more than 50% of the time.