Article

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the reliability and construct and criterion- related validities of the Timed "Up and Go" Assessment of Biomechanical Strategies
(TUG-ABS), when used with subjects with hemiparesis due to stroke within clinical
settings. METHODS: Construct validity was investigated by the following
methods: the known groups, convergence, discriminant analyses, and the opinions
of clinical professionals, who used the TUG-ABS with subjects with stroke. The
criterion-related validity was investigated by comparing the realtime and video
observation scores. Inter-rater reliability was investigated by two independent
examiners using both realtime and video observations. RESULTS: The TUG-ABS
differentiated people with stroke from healthy controls (p < 0.001), was
correlated with the time spent to perform the TUG (rs = -0.85; p < 0.001), and
correctly classified 98% of the subjects with stroke (p < 0.001). In addition,
all of the clinicians who used the TUG-ABS in their clinical settings, provided
positive evaluations. Agreement was also observed between real-time and video
observations (0.27 </= kappa </= 0.85; p < 0.01). Furthermore, the TUG-ABS was
reliable for both real-time (0.24 </= kappa </= 1.00; p < 0.05) and video
observations (0.15 </= kappa </= 0.94; p < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: The TUG-ABS
demonstrated good construct and criterion-related validities, as well as
reliability, when applied in subjects with stroke within clinical settings, which
supported the theoretical assumptions employed for its development.

Langue : ANGLAIS