Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 143
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 143
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 209
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 994
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3134
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 574
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 488
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
The Timed-Up and Go (TUG) test is widely utilized by healthcare professionals for assessing fall risk and mobility due to its practicality. Currently, test results are based solely on execution time, but integrating technological devices into the test can provide additional information to enhance result accuracy. This study aimed to assess the reliability of smartphone-based instrumented TUG (iTUG) parameters. We conducted evaluations of intra- and inter-device reliabilities, hypothesizing that iTUG parameters would be replicable across all experiments. A total of 30 individuals participated in Experiment A to assess intra-device reliability, while Experiment B involved 15 individuals to evaluate inter-device reliability. The smartphone was securely attached to participants' bodies at the lumbar spine level between the L3 and L5 vertebrae. In Experiment A, subjects performed the TUG test three times using the same device, with a 5 min interval between each trial. Experiment B required participants to perform three trials using different devices, with the same time interval between trials. Comparing stopwatch and smartphone measurements in Experiment A, no significant differences in test duration were found between the two devices. A perfect correlation and Bland-Altman analysis indicated good agreement between devices. Intra-device reliability analysis in Experiment A revealed significant reliability in nine out of eleven variables, with four variables showing excellent reliability and five showing moderate to high reliability. In Experiment B, inter-device reliability was observed among different smartphone devices, with nine out of eleven variables demonstrating significant reliability. Notable differences were found in angular velocity peak at the first and second turns between specific devices, emphasizing the importance of considering device variations in inertial measurements. Hence, smartphone inertial sensors present a valid, applicable, and feasible alternative for TUG assessment.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11086236 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s24092918 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!