Cargando…

The Five Times Sit-to-Stand Test: safety and reliability with older intensive care unit patients at discharge

OBJECTIVE: Assess the Five Times Sit-to-Stand Test safety and clinimetric properties in older patients hospitalized in an intensive care unit. METHODS: Test safety was assessed according to the incidence of adverse events and through hemodynamic and respiratory data. Additionally, reliability proper...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: de Melo, Thiago Araújo, Duarte, Antonio Carlos Magalhães, Bezerra, Thaysa Samanta, França, Fabrícia, Soares, Neila Silva, Brito, Debora
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira - AMIB 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6443310/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30892478
http://dx.doi.org/10.5935/0103-507X.20190006
_version_ 1783407833143836672
author de Melo, Thiago Araújo
Duarte, Antonio Carlos Magalhães
Bezerra, Thaysa Samanta
França, Fabrícia
Soares, Neila Silva
Brito, Debora
author_facet de Melo, Thiago Araújo
Duarte, Antonio Carlos Magalhães
Bezerra, Thaysa Samanta
França, Fabrícia
Soares, Neila Silva
Brito, Debora
author_sort de Melo, Thiago Araújo
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: Assess the Five Times Sit-to-Stand Test safety and clinimetric properties in older patients hospitalized in an intensive care unit. METHODS: Test safety was assessed according to the incidence of adverse events and through hemodynamic and respiratory data. Additionally, reliability properties were investigated using the intraclass correlation coefficients, standard error of measurement, standard error percentage change, Altman-Bland plot and a survival agreement plot. RESULTS: The overall suitability of the Five Times Sit-to-Stand Test was found to be low, with 29.8% meeting the inclusion criteria. Only 44% of the hospitalized patients who met the inclusion criteria performed the test, with no need for discontinuation in any patient. Heart rate (79.7 ± 10.2bpm/86.6 ± 9.7bpm; p = 0.001) and systolic blood pressure (118 ± 21.4mmHg/129 ± 21.5mmHg; p = 0.031) were the only variables that presented a significant statistical increase, with no evidence of exacerbated response to the test. Additionally, no adverse events were reported from participating and both test-retest and interrater reliability were high (intraclass correlation coefficient ≥ 0.99). CONCLUSION: The Five Times Sit-to-Stand Test was proven to be safe and to have excellent reliability. Its clinical use, however, may be restricted to high-functioning older adults in hospital settings.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6443310
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira - AMIB
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-64433102019-04-04 The Five Times Sit-to-Stand Test: safety and reliability with older intensive care unit patients at discharge de Melo, Thiago Araújo Duarte, Antonio Carlos Magalhães Bezerra, Thaysa Samanta França, Fabrícia Soares, Neila Silva Brito, Debora Rev Bras Ter Intensiva Original Articles OBJECTIVE: Assess the Five Times Sit-to-Stand Test safety and clinimetric properties in older patients hospitalized in an intensive care unit. METHODS: Test safety was assessed according to the incidence of adverse events and through hemodynamic and respiratory data. Additionally, reliability properties were investigated using the intraclass correlation coefficients, standard error of measurement, standard error percentage change, Altman-Bland plot and a survival agreement plot. RESULTS: The overall suitability of the Five Times Sit-to-Stand Test was found to be low, with 29.8% meeting the inclusion criteria. Only 44% of the hospitalized patients who met the inclusion criteria performed the test, with no need for discontinuation in any patient. Heart rate (79.7 ± 10.2bpm/86.6 ± 9.7bpm; p = 0.001) and systolic blood pressure (118 ± 21.4mmHg/129 ± 21.5mmHg; p = 0.031) were the only variables that presented a significant statistical increase, with no evidence of exacerbated response to the test. Additionally, no adverse events were reported from participating and both test-retest and interrater reliability were high (intraclass correlation coefficient ≥ 0.99). CONCLUSION: The Five Times Sit-to-Stand Test was proven to be safe and to have excellent reliability. Its clinical use, however, may be restricted to high-functioning older adults in hospital settings. Associação de Medicina Intensiva Brasileira - AMIB 2019 /pmc/articles/PMC6443310/ /pubmed/30892478 http://dx.doi.org/10.5935/0103-507X.20190006 Text en http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Articles
de Melo, Thiago Araújo
Duarte, Antonio Carlos Magalhães
Bezerra, Thaysa Samanta
França, Fabrícia
Soares, Neila Silva
Brito, Debora
The Five Times Sit-to-Stand Test: safety and reliability with older intensive care unit patients at discharge
title The Five Times Sit-to-Stand Test: safety and reliability with older intensive care unit patients at discharge
title_full The Five Times Sit-to-Stand Test: safety and reliability with older intensive care unit patients at discharge
title_fullStr The Five Times Sit-to-Stand Test: safety and reliability with older intensive care unit patients at discharge
title_full_unstemmed The Five Times Sit-to-Stand Test: safety and reliability with older intensive care unit patients at discharge
title_short The Five Times Sit-to-Stand Test: safety and reliability with older intensive care unit patients at discharge
title_sort five times sit-to-stand test: safety and reliability with older intensive care unit patients at discharge
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6443310/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30892478
http://dx.doi.org/10.5935/0103-507X.20190006
work_keys_str_mv AT demelothiagoaraujo thefivetimessittostandtestsafetyandreliabilitywitholderintensivecareunitpatientsatdischarge
AT duarteantoniocarlosmagalhaes thefivetimessittostandtestsafetyandreliabilitywitholderintensivecareunitpatientsatdischarge
AT bezerrathaysasamanta thefivetimessittostandtestsafetyandreliabilitywitholderintensivecareunitpatientsatdischarge
AT francafabricia thefivetimessittostandtestsafetyandreliabilitywitholderintensivecareunitpatientsatdischarge
AT soaresneilasilva thefivetimessittostandtestsafetyandreliabilitywitholderintensivecareunitpatientsatdischarge
AT britodebora thefivetimessittostandtestsafetyandreliabilitywitholderintensivecareunitpatientsatdischarge
AT demelothiagoaraujo fivetimessittostandtestsafetyandreliabilitywitholderintensivecareunitpatientsatdischarge
AT duarteantoniocarlosmagalhaes fivetimessittostandtestsafetyandreliabilitywitholderintensivecareunitpatientsatdischarge
AT bezerrathaysasamanta fivetimessittostandtestsafetyandreliabilitywitholderintensivecareunitpatientsatdischarge
AT francafabricia fivetimessittostandtestsafetyandreliabilitywitholderintensivecareunitpatientsatdischarge
AT soaresneilasilva fivetimessittostandtestsafetyandreliabilitywitholderintensivecareunitpatientsatdischarge
AT britodebora fivetimessittostandtestsafetyandreliabilitywitholderintensivecareunitpatientsatdischarge