Validity of an android device for assessing mobility in people with chronic stroke and hemiparesis: a cross-sectional study.
M Luz Sánchez-Sánchez, Maria-Arantzazu Ruescas-Nicolau, Anna Arnal-Gómez and 3 others
PMID 38616288WHAT IT FOUND
A smartphone worn on the back during a timed mobility test showed movement differences in people with chronic stroke who could walk 10 m compared with healthy adults, including more side-to-side sway, less turning power, and longer reaction times.
Key findings
01The smartphone mobility test showed movement differences between chronic stroke participants and healthy controls, including greater side-to-side sway, lower vertical movement while walking, lower turning-to-sit power, and longer total and reaction times.
02In the stroke group, worse performance on the Timed Up and Go, 10-meter walk, and five-times sit-to-stand tests was associated with greater side-to-side movement, longer total time, and longer reaction time on the smartphone test.
03Among stroke participants, those with slight/moderate disability or limited community ambulation had greater side-to-side movement and longer total test time than those with less disability or independent community ambulation.
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 chronic stroke who could walk at least 10 m were included, so the results do not apply to patients who are more severely affected. The study used purposive sampling from brain injury associations and the authors' institution, so the participants may not represent all people with chronic stroke. The paper did not test reliability of the smartphone measures in the stroke group, so it cannot show whether repeated measurements are stable. The smartphone measures were not compared directly with photogrammetry in the same participants, so the study supports group differences and associations but not full diagnostic accuracy against the gold standard. Multiple correlation tests were performed without adjusting the significance threshold, so some associations could be due to chance. The stroke group had worse cognitive status than controls, and the authors note that cognitive status was not an inclusion criterion, so reaction time differences may reflect cognition as well as motor control. Fewer women participated, so gender effects could not be investigated. The modified Ashworth scale was used only descriptively, and the authors caution that it is not an exclusive measure of spasticity.
The easy way to misread this
Do not conclude that the smartphone test improves mobility or can replace clinical assessment. This study only compared movement measures between groups and with existing tests in people who could walk at least 10 m, and it did not test reliability.