TY - JOUR
T1 - Reliability and validity of physical fitness field tests for adults aged 55 to 70 years
AU - Ritchie, C.
AU - Trost, S. G.
AU - Brown, W.
AU - Armit, C.
PY - 2005/3
Y1 - 2005/3
N2 - The aim of this study was to examine the reliability and validity of field tests for assessing physical function in mid-aged and young-old people (55-70 y). Tests were selected that required minimal space and equipment and could be implemented in multiple field settings such as a general practitioner's office. Nineteen participants completed 2 field and 1 laboratory testing sessions. Intra-class correlations showed good reliability for the tests of upper body strength (lift and reach, R= .66), lower body strength (sit to stand, R= .80) and functional capacity (Canadian Step Test, R= .92), but not for leg power (single timed chair rise, R= .28). There was also good reliability for the balance test during 3 stances: parallel (94.7% agreement), semi-tandem (73.7%), and tandem (52.6%). Comparison of field test results with objective laboratory measures found good validity for the sit to stand (cf 1RM leg press, Pearson r= .68, p< .05), and for the step test (cf PWC140, r= -.60, p< .001), but not for the lift and reach (cf IRM bench press, r= .43, p> .05) balance (r= -.13, -.18, .23) and rate of force development tests (r= -.28). It was concluded that the lower body strength and cardiovascular function tests were appropriate for use in field settings with mid-aged and young-old adults.
AB - The aim of this study was to examine the reliability and validity of field tests for assessing physical function in mid-aged and young-old people (55-70 y). Tests were selected that required minimal space and equipment and could be implemented in multiple field settings such as a general practitioner's office. Nineteen participants completed 2 field and 1 laboratory testing sessions. Intra-class correlations showed good reliability for the tests of upper body strength (lift and reach, R= .66), lower body strength (sit to stand, R= .80) and functional capacity (Canadian Step Test, R= .92), but not for leg power (single timed chair rise, R= .28). There was also good reliability for the balance test during 3 stances: parallel (94.7% agreement), semi-tandem (73.7%), and tandem (52.6%). Comparison of field test results with objective laboratory measures found good validity for the sit to stand (cf 1RM leg press, Pearson r= .68, p< .05), and for the step test (cf PWC140, r= -.60, p< .001), but not for the lift and reach (cf IRM bench press, r= .43, p> .05) balance (r= -.13, -.18, .23) and rate of force development tests (r= -.28). It was concluded that the lower body strength and cardiovascular function tests were appropriate for use in field settings with mid-aged and young-old adults.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=17444383099&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/S1440-2440(05)80025-8
DO - 10.1016/S1440-2440(05)80025-8
M3 - Article
C2 - 15887902
AN - SCOPUS:17444383099
SN - 1440-2440
VL - 8
SP - 61
EP - 70
JO - Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport
JF - Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport
IS - 1
ER -