PTOTCohortEuropean journal of physical and rehabilitation medicine2023

Sensor based assessment of turning during instrumented Timed Up and Go Test for quantifying mobility in chronic stroke patients.

Stefania Spina, Salvatore Facciorusso, Milena C D'Ascanio and 4 others

PMID 36511168

WHAT IT FOUND

A wearable sensor on the lower back during a Timed Up and Go test distinguished stroke patients with limited mobility from those with good mobility.

Average turning speed below 39 to 42 degrees per second reliably identified the impaired group, offering a quick objective measure for clinical assessment.

Key findings

01Stroke patients with impaired mobility turned significantly slower than those with available mobility, with average angular speeds of 33.11 degrees per second versus 53.79 degrees per second during mid-turning.

02Average angular speed during end-turning had the highest accuracy for distinguishing mobility groups, with an area under the curve of 0.912 and a cut-off value of 39.1 degrees per second.

03Turning speed parameters showed moderate to strong correlations with functional outcomes such as the 10-meter walk test, Functional Ambulation Category, and modified Rankin Scale.

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 size was relatively small, which may limit the generalizability of the cut-off values. The study used a single sensor, which may be susceptible to errors from sensor movement or placement variations. The cross-sectional design prevents conclusions about whether turning speed changes with rehabilitation or predicts fall risk over time.

The easy way to misread this

Do not assume that a patient who walks well in a straight line has normal turning ability. The study found that turning speed and duration were significantly impaired in patients classified as mobility impaired, even if their sit-to-stand and stand-to-sit times were similar to those with available mobility.

Read it on PubMed →