Assessment of sit-to-stand movement in nonspecific low back pain: a comparison study for psychometric properties of field-based and laboratory-based methods.

One of the most difficult tasks associated with the management of nonspecific low back pain (LBP) is its clinical assessment. Objective functional methods have been developed for assessment. However, few studies have used daily activities such as sit-to-stand (STS). The aim was to compare the psychometric properties of two commonly used STS assessment methods. A test-retest reliability study design was used. Participants with nonspecific LBP performed the 30-s chair stand test (30CST) and the STS test in Balance Master, which measures weight transfer, rising index and centre of gravity sway velocity. The same tests were reperformed after 48-72 h. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), standard error of measurement (SEM), minimal detectable change and coefficient of variation were calculated to compare the reliability. The correlations between the tests, the Oswestry Disability Index and pain intensity were examined for validation. The 30CST had very high intrarater reliability (ICC=0.94). The variables of STS test in Balance Master had moderate intrarater reliability (ICC=0.62-0.69). There were significant correlations between the 30CST, Oswestry Disability Index and pain intensity at activity (P<0.01). The rising index was the only one variable that was significantly correlated with pain intensity at activity (P<0.05). The 30CST as the field-based method to measure STS movement was better than the laboratory-based method in terms of their psychometric properties. Moreover, the 30CST was associated with disability and pain related to LBP. The 30CST is a simple, cheap, less time consuming and psychometrically appropriate method to use in individuals with nonspecific LBP.