身体活跃的大学生中特定身体机能测量指标的实时重测信度和评分者间信度
Real-time test-retest and interrater reliability of select physical performance measures in physically active college-aged students.
作者信息
Tarara Daniel T, Hegedus Eric J, Taylor Jeffrey B
机构信息
Department of Exercise Science High Point University, School of Health Sciences, High Point, NC, USA.
Department of Physical Therapy High Point University, School of Health Sciences, High Point, NC, USA.
出版信息
Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2014 Dec;9(7):874-87.
BACKGROUND
A new 16-item physical performance measure screening battery (16-PPM) was developed in order to expand on established movement based qualitatively scored functional screening batteries to encompass a broader spectrum of quantitatively scored functional constructs such as strength, endurance, and power.
PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this study was quantify the real-time tests-retest and expert versus novice interrater reliability of the 16-PPM screen on a group of physically active college-aged individuals. The authors' hypothesized that the test-retest and interrater reliability of quantitatively-scored performance measures would be highly correlated (ICC ≥ 0.75) and that qualitatively-scored movement screening tests would be moderately correlated (K w = 0.41-0.60).
STUDY DESIGN
Cohort reliability study.
METHODS
Nineteen (8 males, 11 females) healthy physically active college-aged students completed the 16-PPM on two days, one week apart.
RESULTS
The majority of the quantitatively scored components of the 16-PPMs demonstrated good expert-novice interrater reliability (ICC > 0.75), while qualitatively scored tests had moderate (K w = 0.41-0.60) to substantial (K w = 0.61-0.80) agreement. Test-retest reliability was consistent between raters, with most quantitatively scored PPMs exhibiting superior reliability to the qualitatively scored PPMs.
CONCLUSIONS
The 16-PPM test items showed good test-retest and interrater reliability. However, results indicate that expert raters may be more reliable than novice raters for qualitatively scored tests. The validity of this 16-PPM needs to be determined in future studies.
CLINICAL RELEVANCE
Physical performance screening batteries may be used to help identify individuals at risk for future athletic injury; however, current PPMs that rely on qualitatively scored movement screens have exhibited inconsistent and questionable injury prediction validity. The addition of reliable quantitatively scored PPMs may complement qualitatively scored PPMs to improve the battery's predictive ability.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Level III.
背景
开发了一种新的包含16个项目的身体机能测量筛查组合（16-PPM），以在既定的基于运动的定性评分功能筛查组合基础上进行扩展，纳入更广泛的定量评分功能指标，如力量、耐力和功率。
目的/假设：本研究的目的是量化16-PPM筛查在一组身体活跃的大学生中的实时重测信度以及专家与新手评分者间信度。作者假设定量评分的机能测量指标的重测信度和评分者间信度将高度相关（组内相关系数[ICC]≥0.75），而定性评分的运动筛查测试将中度相关（Kappa值[Kw]=0.41 - 0.60）。
研究设计
队列信度研究。
方法
19名（8名男性，11名女性）健康且身体活跃的大学生在相隔一周的两天内完成了16-PPM测试。
结果
16-PPM的大多数定量评分部分显示出良好的专家-新手评分者间信度（ICC>0.75），而定性评分测试具有中度（Kw = 0.41 - 0.60）到高度（Kw = 0.61 - 0.80）的一致性。评分者间的重测信度一致，大多数定量评分的PPM表现出比定性评分的PPM更高的信度。
结论
16-PPM测试项目显示出良好的重测信度和评分者间信度。然而，结果表明对于定性评分测试，专家评分者可能比新手评分者更可靠。该16-PPM的效度需要在未来研究中确定。
临床意义
身体机能筛查组合可用于帮助识别未来有运动损伤风险的个体；然而，目前依赖定性评分运动筛查的PPM在损伤预测效度方面表现出不一致且存在疑问。增加可靠的定量评分PPM可能补充定性评分PPM，以提高该组合的预测能力。
证据水平
三级。
Zotero 插件