↓ Skip to main content

Test-retest reliability and sensitivity of the 20-meter walk test among patients with knee osteoarthritis

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, May 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
62 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
144 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Test-retest reliability and sensitivity of the 20-meter walk test among patients with knee osteoarthritis
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, May 2013
DOI 10.1186/1471-2474-14-166
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jillian M Motyl, Jeffrey B Driban, Erica McAdams, Lori Lyn Price, Timothy E McAlindon

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The 20-meter walk test is a physical function measure commonly used in clinical research studies and rehabilitation clinics to measure gait speed and monitor changes in patients' physical function over time. Unfortunately, the reliability and sensitivity of this walk test are not well defined and, therefore, limit our ability to evaluate real changes in gait speed not attributable to normal variability. The aim of this study was to assess the test-restest reliability and sensitivity of the 20-meter walk test, at a self-selected pace, among patients with mild to moderate knee osteoarthritis (OA) and to suggest a standardized protocol for future test administration. METHODS: This was a measurement reliability study. Fifteen consecutive people enrolled in a randomized-controlled trial of intra-articular corticosteroid injections for knee OA participated in this study. All participants completed 4 trials on 2 separate days, 7 to 21 days apart (8 trials total). Each day was divided into 2 sessions, which each involved 2 walking trials. We compared walk times between trials with Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. Similar analyses compared average walk times between sessions. To confirm these analyses, we also calculated Spearman correlation coefficients to assess the relationship between sessions. Finally, smallest detectable differences (SDD) were calculated to estimate the sensitivity of the 20-meter walk test. RESULTS: Wilcoxon signed-rank tests between trials within the same session demonstrated that trials in session 1 were significantly different and in the subsequent 3 sessions, the median differences between trials were not significantly different. Therefore, the first session of each day was considered a practice session, and the SDD between the second session of each day were calculated. SDD was -1.59 seconds (walking slower) and 0.15 seconds (walking faster). CONCLUSIONS: Practice trials and a standardized protocol should be used in administration of the 20-meter walk test. Changes in walk time between -1.59 seconds (walking slower) and 0.15 seconds (walking faster) should be considered within the range of normal variability of 20-meter walking speed. The primary limitation of our study was a small sample size, which may influence the generalizability of our findings.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 144 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 142 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 22 15%
Student > Master 17 12%
Researcher 13 9%
Student > Postgraduate 9 6%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 6%
Other 25 17%
Unknown 49 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 42 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 26 18%
Sports and Recreations 4 3%
Neuroscience 3 2%
Psychology 3 2%
Other 14 10%
Unknown 52 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 03 July 2013.
All research outputs
#6,342,784
of 22,710,079 outputs
Outputs from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#1,218
of 4,028 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,620
of 193,511 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
#25
of 75 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,710,079 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,028 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 193,511 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 75 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.