Comparison of Standard Clinical and Instrumented Physical Performance Tests in Discriminating Functional Status of High-Functioning People Aged 61–70 Years Old
by
Alice Coni 1
, Jeanine M. Van Ancum 2, Ronny Bergquist 3, A. Stefanie Mikolaizak 4, Sabato Mellone 1,5, Lorenzo Chiari 1,5, Andrea B. Maier 2,6 and Mirjam Pijnappels 2,*
Alice Coni 1, Jeanine M. Van Ancum 2, Ronny Bergquist 3, A. Stefanie Mikolaizak 4, Sabato Mellone 1,5, Lorenzo Chiari 1,5, Andrea B. Maier 2,6 and Mirjam Pijnappels 2,*
1
Department of Electrical, Electronic and Information Engineering “Guglielmo Marconi” (DEI), University of Bologna, 40136 Bologna, Italy
2
Department of Human Movement Sciences, @AgeAmsterdam, Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, 1081 BT Amsterdam, The Netherlands
3
Department of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, 7491 Trondheim, Norway
4
Department of Clinical Gerontology, Robert Bosch Medical Foundation, 70376 Stuttgart, Germany
5
Health Sciences and Technologies—Interdepartmental Center for Industrial Research (HST-ICIR), University of Bologna, 40126 Bologna, Italy
6
Department of Medicine and Aged Care, @AgeMelbourne, University of Melbourne, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, VIC 3050, Australia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sensors 2019, 19(3), 449; https://doi.org/10.3390/s19030449
Received: 30 November 2018 / Revised: 18 January 2019 / Accepted: 19 January 2019 / Published: 22 January 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Smartphone-Based Sensors for Posture, Movement Analysis and Human Activity Recognition)
Assessment of physical performance by standard clinical tests such as the 30-s Chair Stand (30CST) and the Timed Up and Go (TUG) may allow early detection of functional decline, even in high-functioning populations, and facilitate preventive interventions. Inertial sensors are emerging to obtain instrumented measures that can provide subtle details regarding the quality of the movement while performing such tests. We compared standard clinical with instrumented measures of physical performance in their ability to distinguish between high and very high functional status, stratified by the Late-Life Function and Disability Instrument (LLFDI). We assessed 160 participants from the PreventIT study (66.3 ± 2.4 years, 87 females, median LLFDI 72.31, range: 44.33–100) performing the 30CST and TUG while a smartphone was attached to their lower back. The number of 30CST repetitions and the stopwatch-based TUG duration were recorded. Instrumented features were computed from the smartphone embedded inertial sensors. Four logistic regression models were fitted and the Areas Under the Receiver Operating Curve (AUC) were calculated and compared using the DeLong test. Standard clinical and instrumented measures of 30CST both showed equal moderate discriminative ability of 0.68 (95%CI 0.60–0.76), p = 0.97. Similarly, for TUG: AUC was 0.68 (95%CI 0.60–0.77) and 0.65 (95%CI 0.56–0.73), respectively, p = 0.26. In conclusion, both clinical and instrumented measures, recorded through a smartphone, can discriminate early functional decline in healthy adults aged 61–70 years.
View Full-Text
▼
Show Figures
Figure 1
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited
- Supplementary File 1:
PDF-Document (PDF, 309 KB)
MDPI and ACS Style
Coni, A.; Van Ancum, J.M.; Bergquist, R.; Mikolaizak, A.S.; Mellone, S.; Chiari, L.; Maier, A.B.; Pijnappels, M. Comparison of Standard Clinical and Instrumented Physical Performance Tests in Discriminating Functional Status of High-Functioning People Aged 61–70 Years Old. Sensors 2019, 19, 449.
Show more citation formats
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.
