PTOTPilotBrazilian journal of physical therapy2017

Evaluation of the Glittre-ADL test as an instrument for classifying functional capacity of individuals with cardiovascular diseases.

Aline A Fernandes-Andrade, Raquel R Britto, Daniele C M Soares and 2 others

PMID 28711380

WHAT IT FOUND

In 42 adults with cardiovascular disease, Glittre ADL test times differed across groups defined by walking and activity questionnaire scores.

It may add daily task information to walking tests. Normal values are unknown.

Key findings

01The Glittre ADL test time differed significantly across tertiles defined by the incremental shuttle walk test, Duke Activity Status Index and Human Activity Profile scores.

02Most hemodynamic variables did not differ significantly between the Glittre ADL test and the incremental shuttle walk test, except final diastolic blood pressure.

03Participants completed the Glittre ADL test in 194.61 ± 44.81 seconds on average.

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.

Already have one?

What it does not show

The sample was broad, with many different cardiovascular conditions, so the results may not apply to any one diagnosis. Only one participant had heart failure, a condition often associated with exercise intolerance. No normal values for the Glittre ADL test were available, so a single patient time cannot be interpreted against a reference range. The authors described the study as a pilot, and 10 of 52 recruited participants were excluded. Test-retest reliability was checked in only nine people before the main data collection.

Declared interests

The authors declared no conflicts of interest.

The easy way to misread this

Do not conclude that the Glittre ADL test is a validated replacement for the incremental shuttle walk test. The authors state it should not be used indiscriminately to substitute current tests, normal values are unknown, and the study was described as a pilot.

Read it on PubMed →