Consistency and test–retest reliability of stepping tests designed to measure self-perceived and actual physical stepping ability in older adults

BACKGROUND: Older adults with an incorrect perception of their physical abilities may fall more often, suggesting a need for tests to quantify self-perceived and actual abilities. AIMS: To determine between-test consistency and test–retest reliability of three tests that measure self-perceived and actual stepping ability in older adults. METHODS: Older adults performed three stepping tests, covering high (bar test) and far steps (river and step tests). We studied between-test consistency in the perceived ability and actual ability of 269 participants at each task and in the difference between these two (degree of misjudgment). We also studied test–retest reliability in 21 participants. RESULTS: Perceived ability showed moderate consistency (r = 0.46–0.55, p < 0.001) and moderate-to-strong reliability [ICC(2,1) = 0.42–0.63, p < 0.03] for all tests. Actual ability showed strong consistency (r = 0.77, p < 0.001) and strong-to-excellent reliability [ICC(2,1) = 0.68–0.93, p < 0.001]. Degree of misjudgment was weakly consistent between two stepping far tests (r = 0.32, p < 0.001), but not consistent between stepping far and high tests (r = 0.05 and 0.06, p > 0.3). Test–retest reliability of the degree of misjudgment was poor-to-moderate [ICC(2,1) = 0.38 and 0.50, p < 0.05 on the two stepping far tests and ICC(2,1) = − 0.08, p = 0.63 on the stepping high test]. CONCLUSIONS: Actual and perceived ability can be consistently and reliably measured across tests, whereas the degree of misjudgment is less reliable and consistent within individuals.