Mobility Assessment Instruments.
Kristen L Fessele, Grigory Syrkin
PMID 39013731WHAT IT FOUND
No single mobility test fits all cancer patients.
Quick bedside options include gait speed, chair rise, Timed Up and Go and BMAT; longer PT and OT evaluations use balance, strength and patient-reported measures.
Key findings
01Nurses caring for cancer patients need mobility tools that are meaningful and practical for their setting, and bedside nursing tools differ from longer PT and OT evaluations.
02The Banner/Bedside Mobility Assessment Test has nurses observe a 4-step sequence and match the highest successful mobility level to transfer equipment; initial reliability testing showed 93% agreement among expert nurses.
03Gait speed requires minimal equipment and has prognostic value: in a cohort of 413 participants, median survival was 12.6 years for gait speed above 0.6 meters per second and 5.8 years for gait speed below 0.6 meters per second.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTsWhat it means for RNs
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
This is a narrative review, not a guideline or meta-analysis; it describes tools but does not compare them head-to-head or rate the quality of included studies. Many reliability and prognostic figures come from older adults, stroke, ICU, general cancer or non-cancer cohorts, so they may not apply to every oncology patient. The 6-minute walk test validation was in higher-functioning cancer patients, so it may not fit sicker or bedbound patients. Karnofsky and ECOG ratings are subjective, and agreement between clinicians and patients is low. BMAT agreement with physical therapist evaluation was 81%, and nurses tended to slightly overestimate mobility, so a bedside score may not match a PT evaluation. Wearable accuracy varies, with better accuracy for steps and heart rate than energy expenditure, and privacy is a concern. Assessment alone cannot improve outcomes.
Declared interests
The authors declare no competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work.
The easy way to misread this
Do not treat the reported gait speed, chair rise or Timed Up and Go cutpoints as universal cancer thresholds. The review reports prognostic and reliability data from selected studies, and it states that assessment alone cannot improve outcomes.