Evaluation of fatigability measurement: Integrative review.
Inah Kim, Eileen Hacker, Carol Estwing Ferrans and 3 others
PMID 28666548WHAT IT FOUND
No standard way exists to measure fatigability, or activity-related fatigue, in older adults.
Most tools are single-item ratings after a walking or other activity, and only 6 of 17 had reported evidence that they measure what they claim or give stable results.
Key findings
01No gold standard exists for fatigability measurement in research or clinical practice.
02Most fatigability measures used a single item to quantify fatigue, often after a performance test, and walking test protocols varied widely.
03Validity or reliability information was reported for only 6 of 17 measures.
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
The search was limited to English articles published between January 2010 and January 2016, so relevant studies in other languages or later dates were not included. Abstracts, unpublished studies and review papers were excluded, so some fatigability measures or findings may be missing. Most included studies used healthy elderly samples, small samples and cross-sectional designs, so the results may not apply to patients with problematic fatigue or to change over time. Only 6 of 17 measures reported validity or reliability, and no measure was used in more than one study, so direct comparisons are limited.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read this review as endorsing a fatigability measure for routine clinical use. No gold standard exists, only 6 of 17 measures reported validity or reliability, and walking test protocols varied.