Article

One of the most difficult tasks associated with the management of nonspecific low
back pain (LBP) is its clinical assessment. Objective functional methods have
been developed for assessment. However, few studies have used daily activities
such as sit-to-stand (STS).
The aim was to compare the psychometric properties of
two commonly used STS assessment methods. A test-retest reliability study design
was used. Participants with nonspecific LBP performed the 30-s chair stand test
(30CST) and the STS test in Balance Master, which measures weight transfer,
rising index and centre of gravity sway velocity. The same tests were reperformed
after 48-72 h. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), standard error of
measurement (SEM), minimal detectable change and coefficient of variation were
calculated to compare the reliability. The correlations between the tests, the
Oswestry Disability Index and pain intensity were examined for validation. The 30CST had very high intrarater reliability (ICC=0.94). The variables of STS test
in Balance Master had moderate intrarater reliability (ICC=0.62-0.69). There were
significant correlations between the 30CST, Oswestry Disability Index and pain
intensity at activity (P<0.01).
The rising index was the only one variable that
was significantly correlated with pain intensity at activity (P<0.05). The 30CST
as the field-based method to measure STS movement was better than the
laboratory-based method in terms of their psychometric properties. Moreover, the
30CST was associated with disability and pain related to LBP. The 30CST is a
simple, cheap, less time consuming and psychometrically appropriate method to use
in individuals with nonspecific LBP.

Langue : ANGLAIS