Advertisement

Reliability and validity of the timed 360° turn test in people with Parkinson’s disease

  • 5 Accesses

Key Summary Points

AbstractSection Aim

To determine the reliability and validity of the timed 360° turn test in people with Parkinson’s Disease (PwPD).

AbstractSection Findings

The timed 360° turn test was found to have excellent intrarater, interrater, and test–retest reliability, and was correlated with functional mobility, functional and dynamic balance, motor symptoms, and severity and stage of the disease in Parkinson’s Disease (PD). The time taken to complete 360° turn was found to well discriminate PwPD from healthy people and fallers from non-fallers with PD.

AbstractSection Message

The timed 360° turn test is a clinically available measurement tool for assessing turning ability and predicting both physical performance and PD-specific impairments in PD.

Abstract

Purpose

The objectives of this study were to examine (1) the intrarater, interrater, and test–retest reliability of the timed 360° turn test in people with Parkinson’s Disease (PwPD); (2) the minimum detectable change in the timed 360° turn test times; (3) the concurrent and discriminant validity of the timed 360° turn test; (4) the cut-off times which best discriminate PwPD from healthy people and fallers from non-fallers with Parkinson’s Disease (PD).

Methods

Fifty-four PwPD and 32 healthy people were included. The timed 360° turn test was administered along with Timed Up and Go Test, Berg Balance Scale, Four Square Step Test, Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale, and Hoehn and Yahr Scale. In addition, PwPD were categorized into fallers and non-fallers based on fall history. Reliability analyses were assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients in a subgroup of 38 PwPD.

Results

The timed 360° turn test had excellent intrarater, interrater, and test–retest reliability. It was strongly correlated with other outcome measures (p < 0.001). In both sides, significant differences in the timed 360° turn test times were found between PwPD and healthy people and between fallers and non-fallers with PD (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001, respectively). The timed 360° turn test times of 3.76–3.89 s were found to best discriminate PwPD from healthy people, while 5.46–5.74 s were found to best discriminate fallers from non-fallers with PD. The minimum detectable change in the timed 360° turn test times were 1.98 s for dominant side and 1.48 s for non-dominant side in PwPD.

Conclusions

The timed 360° turn test is a reliable, valid, and clinically available tool for assessing turning ability in PwPD.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant unlimited access to the full article PDF.

US$ 39.95

Price includes VAT for USA

Subscribe to journal

Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.

US$ 99

This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. 1.

    Meissner WG, Frasier M, Gasser T, Goetz CG, Lozano A et al (2011) Priorities in Parkinson’s disease research. Nat Rev Drug Discov 10:377–393

  2. 2.

    Kim SD, Allen NE, Canning CG, Fung VS (2013) Postural instability in patients with Parkinson’s disease. Epidemiology, pathophysiology and management. CNS Drugs 27:97–112

  3. 3.

    Allen NE, Schwarzel AK, Canning CG (2013) Recurrent falls in Parkinson’s disease: a systematic review. Parkinson’s Dis 2013:906274

  4. 4.

    Idjadi JA, Aharonoff GB, Su H, Richmond J, Egol KA et al (2005) Hip fracture outcomes in patients with Parkinson’s disease. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead, NJ) 34:341–346

  5. 5.

    Canning CG, Paul SS, Nieuwboer A (2014) Prevention of falls in Parkinson’s disease: a review of fall risk factors and the role of physical interventions. Neurodegener Dis Manag 4:203–221

  6. 6.

    Paul SS, Harvey L, Canning CG, Boufous S, Lord SR et al (2017) Fall-related hospitalization in people with Parkinson’s disease. Eur J Neurol 24:523–529

  7. 7.

    Spottke AE, Reuter M, Machat O, Bornschein B, von Campenhausen S et al (2005) Cost of illness and its predictors for Parkinson’s disease in Germany. Pharmacoeconomics 23:817–836

  8. 8.

    Jones CA, Martin WW, Wieler M, King-Jesso P, Voaklander DC (2012) Incidence and mortality of Parkinson’s disease in older Canadians. Parkinsonism Relat Disord 18:327–331

  9. 9.

    Glaister BC, Bernatz GC, Klute GK, Orendurff MS (2007) Video task analysis of turning during activities of daily living. Gait Posture 25:289–294

  10. 10.

    Crenna P, Carpinella I, Rabuffetti M, Calabrese E, Mazzoleni P et al (2007) The association between impaired turning and normal straight walking in Parkinson’s disease. Gait Posture 26:172–178

  11. 11.

    Stack E, Ashburn A (1999) Fall events described by people with Parkinson’s disease: implications for clinical interviewing and the research agenda. Physiother Res Int 4:190–200

  12. 12.

    Stack EL, Asburn AM, Jupp KE (1994) Strategies used by people with Parkinson’s disease who report difficulty turning. Parkinsonism Relat Disord 12:87–92

  13. 13.

    Hulbert S, Ashburn A, Robert L, Verheyden G (2015) A narrative review of turning deficits in people with Parkinson’s disease. Disabil Rehab 37:1382–1389

  14. 14.

    Morris ME, Huxham F, McGinley J, Dodd K, Iansek R (2001) The biomechanics and motor control of gait in Parkinson’s disease. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 16:459–470

  15. 15.

    Stack E, Ashburn A (2008) Dysfunctional turning in Parkinson’s disease. Disabil Rehab 30:1222–1229

  16. 16.

    Mellone S, Mancini M, King LA, Horak FB, Chiari L (2016) The quality of turning in Parkinson’s disease: a compensatory strategy to prevent postural instability? J Neuroeng Rehabil 13:39

  17. 17.

    Huxham F, Baker R, Morris ME, Iansek R (2008) Head and trunk rotation during walking turns in Parkinson’s disease. Mov Disord 23:1391–1397

  18. 18.

    Visser JE, Voermans NC, Nijhuis LBO, van der Eijk M, Nijk R et al (2007) Quantification of trunk rotations during turning and walking in Parkinson’s disease. Clin Neurophysiol 118:1602–1606

  19. 19.

    Sofuwa O, Nieuwboer A, Desloovere K, Willems AM, Chavret F et al (2005) Quantitative gait analysis in Parkinson’s disease: comparison with a healthy control group. Arc Phys Med Rehabil 86:1007–1013

  20. 20.

    Schaafsma JD, Balash Y, Gurevich T, Bartels AL, Hausdorff JM et al (2003) Characterization of freezing of gait subtypes and the response of each to levodopa in Parkinson’s disease. Eur J Neurol 10:391–398

  21. 21.

    Podsiadlo D, Richardson S (1991) The timed “Up & Go”: a test of basic functional mobility for frail elderly persons. J Am Geriatr Soc 39:142–148

  22. 22.

    Berg KO, Wood-Dauphinee SL, Williams JI, Gayton D (1989) Measuring balance in the elderly: preliminary development of an instrument. Physiother Can 41:304–311

  23. 23.

    Gill TM, Williams CS, Tinetti ME (1995) Assessing risk for the onset of functional dependence among older adults: the role of physical performance. J Am Geriatr Soc 43:603–609

  24. 24.

    Schenkman M, Cutson TM, Kuchibhatla M, Chandler J, Pieper C (1997) Reliability of impairment and physical performance measures for persons with Parkinson’s disease. Phys Ther 77:19–27

  25. 25.

    Shiu CH, Ng SS, Kwong PW, Liu TW, Tam EW et al (2016) Timed 360° turn test for assessing people with chronic stroke. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 97:536–544

  26. 26.

    Lexell JE, Downham DY (2005) How to assess the reliability of measurement in rehabilitation. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 84:719–723

  27. 27.

    Hughes AJ, Daniel SE, Kilford L, Lees AJ (1992) Accuracy of clinical diagnosis of idiopathic Parkinson’s disease. A clinicopathological study of 100 cases. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 55:181–184

  28. 28.

    Hoehn MM, Yahr MD (1967) Parkinsonism: onset, progression, and mortality. Neurology 17:427–442

  29. 29.

    Mathias S, Nayak US, Isaacs B (1986) Balance in elderly patients: the” get-up and go” test. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 67:387–389

  30. 30.

    Huang SL, Hsieh CL, Wu RM, Tai CH, Lin CH et al (2011) Minimal detectable change of the timed “up & go” test and the dynamic gait index in people with Parkinson disease. Phys Ther 91:114–121

  31. 31.

    Verheyden G, Kampshoff CS, Burnett ME, Cashell J, Martinelli L et al (2014) Psychometric properties of 3 functional mobility tests for people with Parkinson disease. Phys Ther 94:230–239

  32. 32.

    Schlenstedt C, Brombacher S, Hartwigsen G, Weisser B, Möller B et al (2015) Comparing the Fullerton Advanced Balance Scale with the Mini-BESTest and Berg Balance Scale to assess postural control in patients with Parkinson disease. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 96:218–225

  33. 33.

    Dite W, Temple VA (2002) A clinical test of stepping and change of direction to identify multiple falling older adults. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 83:1566–1571

  34. 34.

    Duncan RP, Earhart GM (2013) Four square step test performance in people with Parkinson disease. J Neurol Phys Ther 37:2–8

  35. 35.

    Movement Disorder Society Task Force on Rating Scales for Parkinson’s Disease (2003) The Unified Parkinson’s Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS): status and recommendations. Mov Disord 18:738–750

  36. 36.

    Finlayson ML, Peterson EW, Cho CC (2006) Risk factors for falling among people aged 45 to 90 years with multiple sclerosis. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 87:1274–1279

  37. 37.

    Portney LG, Watkins MP (2009) Foundations of clinical research: applications to practice, 3rd edn. Pearson/Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River

  38. 38.

    Domholdt E (2005) Rehabilitation research: principles and applications, 3rd edn. Elsevier Saunders, St Louis

  39. 39.

    Fan J, Upadhye S, Worster A (2006) Understanding receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. CJEM 8:19–20

  40. 40.

    Altman DG, Bland JM (1994) Diagnostic tests 2: predictive values. BMJ 309:102

  41. 41.

    Revicki D, Hays RD, Cella D, Sloan J (2007) Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcome. J Clin Epidemiol 61:102–109

  42. 42.

    Kloos AD, Fritz NE, Kostyk SK, Young GS, Kegelmeyer DA (2014) Clinimetric properties of the Tinetti Mobility Test, Four Square Step Test, Activities-specific Balance Confidence Scale, and spatiotemporal gait measures in individuals with Huntington’s disease. Gait Posture 40:647–651

  43. 43.

    Goldberg A, Schepens S (2011) Measurement error and minimum detectable change in 4-meter gait speed in older adults. Aging Clin Exp Res 23:406–412

  44. 44.

    Son M, Youm C, Cheon S, Kim J, Lee M et al (2017) Evaluation of the turning characteristics according to the severity of Parkinson disease during the timed up and go test. Aging Clin Exp Res 29:1191–1199

  45. 45.

    Cheng FY, Yang YR, Wang CJ, Wu YR, Cheng SJ et al (2014) Factors influencing turning and its relationship with falls in individuals with Parkinson’s disease. PLoS ONE 9:e93572

  46. 46.

    Schenkman M, Ellis T, Christiansen C, Barón AE, Tickle-Degnen L et al (2011) Profile of functional limitations and task performance among people with early-and middle-stage Parkinson disease. Phys Ther 91:1339–1354

  47. 47.

    Jessop RT, Horowicz C, Dibble LE (2006) Motor learning and Parkinson disease: refinement of movement velocity and endpoint excursion in a limits of stability balance task. Neurorehabil Neural Repair 20:459–467

  48. 48.

    Yang YR, Lee YY, Cheng SJ, Lin PY, Wang RY (2008) Relationships between gait and dynamic balance in early Parkinson’s disease. Gait Posture 27:611–615

  49. 49.

    Snijders AH, Haaxma CA, Hagen YJ, Munneke M, Bloem BR (2012) Freezer or non-freezer: clinical assessment of freezing of gait. Parkinsonism Relat Disord 18:149–154

  50. 50.

    Kumar R, Indrayan A (2011) Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve for medical researchers. Indian Pediatr 48:277–287

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Fatih Soke.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in the study involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Institutional Research Committee (Gazi University Clinical Research Ethics Committee, Ethical number: 441 at date 2018-06-11) and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all participants.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Soke, F., Guclu-Gunduz, A., Ozkan, T. et al. Reliability and validity of the timed 360° turn test in people with Parkinson’s disease. Eur Geriatr Med (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41999-019-00285-y

Download citation

Keywords

  • Parkinson’s Disease
  • Rehabilitation
  • Reliability
  • Turning ability
  • Validity