RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Responsiveness of functional assessments to monitor change in balance, walking speed and strength of older adults: A systematic review of the minimal detectable change
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2022.06.06.22276029
DO 10.1101/2022.06.06.22276029
A1 Arkesteijn, Marco
A1 Low, Daniel
YR 2022
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2022/06/06/2022.06.06.22276029.abstract
AB Objectives The objective of this paper is to systematically review and evaluate the responsiveness of different functional tests via the minimal detectable change (MDC) across different older adult population cohorts.Design Systematic review of ISI Web of Knowledge and PubMed databases were searched up to September 26th 2020.Setting Community dwellings, hospital and residential homesParticipants Studies were included if participants were adults over the age of 60. This study reports data from studies that utilise healthy community dwelling older adults, as well as older adults who are hospitalised, live in residential home or have musculoskeletal conditions.Interventions No interventions feature in this studyPrimary and secondary outcome measures MDC reported for gait speed, grip strength, balance, timed up and go, and repeated chair stand separated per older adult sub-group were deemed the primary outcome measure. A secondary outcome measure were the results of a regression analysis, performed to determine the effect of the functional test, cohort, study design and MDC calculation methodology on MDC magnitude.Results Thirty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria. Not all assessments were evaluated in the literature for all population cohorts. The MDC was affected by the functional test used, the cohort and MDC calculation methodology.Conclusion The MDC can be assessment and population specific, and thus this should be taken into account when using the MDC. It appears acceptable that different assessors are involved in the re-assessment of the same person.Trial registration The systematic review protocol was published in PROSPERO (CRD42019147527).Strengths and Limitations of this StudyStrength: A range of assessments were included to determine if MDC could be used to prioritize specific assessments in interventions.Strength: A wide range of search criteria and methods resulting in 6448 studies being assessed that enabled the inclusion of 39 original research papers to derive 138 MDC values.Strength: Analysis of MDC95 for functional tests commonly used by practitioners to assess effective change in older adultsStrength: Analyses of the impact of method design features such as different assessors on the MDCLimitation: Limited to the settings and tests selectedCompeting Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Clinical Protocols https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=147527 Funding StatementThis study was part funded by European Innovation and Technology Health.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:N/AI confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll data is retrievable from the manuscript and supplementary files, including the search results via EndNote files. https://osf.io/jc7b8/?view_only=a53734d68e20463c9b007efe60453711