Comparison of two popular transducers to measure sit-to-stand power in older adults
The Tendo Unit (TU) and GymAware (GA) are the two most frequently used linear transducers for assessing muscle power in older adults via the sit-to-stand (STS) test. Unlike TU, GA incorporates a sensor mechanism to correct for non-vertical movements, which may lead to systematic differences between...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | PloS one 2024-08, Vol.19 (8), p.e0308808 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 8 |
| container_start_page | e0308808 |
| container_title | PloS one |
| container_volume | 19 |
| creator | Balachandran, Anoop T Orange, Samuel T Wang, Yipeng Lustin, Renee Vega, Andy Quiles, Norberto |
| description | The Tendo Unit (TU) and GymAware (GA) are the two most frequently used linear transducers for assessing muscle power in older adults via the sit-to-stand (STS) test. Unlike TU, GA incorporates a sensor mechanism to correct for non-vertical movements, which may lead to systematic differences between devices. The aim of this study therefore was to compare GA to TU for measuring STS power in community-dwelling older adults. Community-dwelling adults (n = 51, aged ≥65 years, 61% female) completed a single chair stand, with peak power measured simultaneously using GA and TU. Participants also completed the pneumatic leg press, 8-Foot Up and Go (TUG) test, Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB), and self-reported measures of physical function. Intraclass correlations (ICC) were used to assess agreement, and Pearson's correlations were used to assess correlations. The study protocol was prospectively registered on the Open Science Framework. In alignment with our pre-registered hypothesis, peak power demonstrated an ICC of 0.93 (95% CI: 0.88, 0.96). For secondary aims, both transducers showed a correlation greater than 0.8 compared to pneumatic leg press power. For physical performance outcomes, both TU and GA showed similar correlations, as hypothesized: SPPB (r = 0.29 for TU vs. 0.33 for GA), Chair Stands (r = -0.41 vs. -0.38), TUG Fast (r = -0.53 vs. -0.52), mobility questionnaire (r = 0.52 vs. 0.52) and physical function questionnaire (r = 0.44 vs. 0.43). GA and TU peak power showed a high degree of agreement and similar correlations with physical and self-reported performance measures, suggesting that both methods can be used for assessing STS power in older adults. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1371/journal.pone.0308808 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_plos_</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_plos_journals_3092274227</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A804592469</galeid><doaj_id>oai_doaj_org_article_08dd48af620746cf819eec8a77aac573</doaj_id><sourcerecordid>A804592469</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c572t-9c3205ba35d7bd5a5b84c80f2d26127d69defb3a353b3b2c38a21f3f2d4340a23</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkl2L1DAUhoso7rr6D0QLguhFx3y1Ta9kGfwYWFhw1dtwmqQzWdKmJqmr_96M012mshdSSkPO8745eXuy7DlGK0xr_O7aTX4AuxrdoFeIIs4Rf5Cd4oaSoiKIPjxan2RPQrhGqKS8qh5nJ7TBlNYlO82u1q4fwZvghtx1ebxx-ejGyYLPo4chqElqH_Lo8l5DmLzOg4lFdEWIMKjE3mifm6S1Ki1ATTaGp9mjDmzQz-bvWfbt44ev68_FxeWnzfr8opBlTWLRSEpQ2QItVd2qEsqWM8lRRxSpMKlV1SjdtTTVaUtbIikHgjua6owyBISeZS8PvqN1Qcx5BEFRQ0jN0puIzYFQDq7F6E0P_rdwYMTfDee3Anw00mqBuFKMQ5fiqlklO44brSWHugZI_dLk9X4-bWp7raQeUkB2YbqsDGYntu6nwJhizut9v29mB-9-TDpE0ZsgtbUwaDcdGqdVRRlL6Kt_0PuvN1NbSDcwQ-fSwXJvKs45YmVDWNUkanUPlR6leyPT9HQm7S8EbxeCxET9K25hCkFsrr78P3v5fcm-PmJ3GmzcBWenaNwQliA7gNK7ELzu7lLGSOyH_zYNsR9-MQ9_kr04_kN3ottpp38Abwr_EQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Website</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>3092274227</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of two popular transducers to measure sit-to-stand power in older adults</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry</source><creator>Balachandran, Anoop T ; Orange, Samuel T ; Wang, Yipeng ; Lustin, Renee ; Vega, Andy ; Quiles, Norberto</creator><contributor>Sergi, Giuseppe</contributor><creatorcontrib>Balachandran, Anoop T ; Orange, Samuel T ; Wang, Yipeng ; Lustin, Renee ; Vega, Andy ; Quiles, Norberto ; Sergi, Giuseppe</creatorcontrib><description>The Tendo Unit (TU) and GymAware (GA) are the two most frequently used linear transducers for assessing muscle power in older adults via the sit-to-stand (STS) test. Unlike TU, GA incorporates a sensor mechanism to correct for non-vertical movements, which may lead to systematic differences between devices. The aim of this study therefore was to compare GA to TU for measuring STS power in community-dwelling older adults. Community-dwelling adults (n = 51, aged ≥65 years, 61% female) completed a single chair stand, with peak power measured simultaneously using GA and TU. Participants also completed the pneumatic leg press, 8-Foot Up and Go (TUG) test, Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB), and self-reported measures of physical function. Intraclass correlations (ICC) were used to assess agreement, and Pearson's correlations were used to assess correlations. The study protocol was prospectively registered on the Open Science Framework. In alignment with our pre-registered hypothesis, peak power demonstrated an ICC of 0.93 (95% CI: 0.88, 0.96). For secondary aims, both transducers showed a correlation greater than 0.8 compared to pneumatic leg press power. For physical performance outcomes, both TU and GA showed similar correlations, as hypothesized: SPPB (r = 0.29 for TU vs. 0.33 for GA), Chair Stands (r = -0.41 vs. -0.38), TUG Fast (r = -0.53 vs. -0.52), mobility questionnaire (r = 0.52 vs. 0.52) and physical function questionnaire (r = 0.44 vs. 0.43). GA and TU peak power showed a high degree of agreement and similar correlations with physical and self-reported performance measures, suggesting that both methods can be used for assessing STS power in older adults.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1932-6203</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0308808</identifier><identifier>PMID: 39133754</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Public Library of Science</publisher><subject>Adults ; Aged ; Aged, 80 and over ; Analysis ; Arthritis ; Biology and Life Sciences ; Circuit components ; Computer and Information Sciences ; Correlation ; Engineering and Technology ; Female ; Humans ; Independent Living ; Male ; Measuring instruments ; Medicine and Health Sciences ; Muscle Strength - physiology ; Muscle, Skeletal - physiology ; Older people ; People and Places ; Physical Sciences ; Questionnaires ; Research and Analysis Methods ; Sitting Position ; Software ; Standing Position ; Transducers ; Validity ; Velocity ; Warm up (exercise)</subject><ispartof>PloS one, 2024-08, Vol.19 (8), p.e0308808</ispartof><rights>Copyright: © 2024 Balachandran et al. 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 author and source are credited.</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2024 Public Library of Science</rights><rights>2024 Balachandran et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><rights>2024 Balachandran et al 2024 Balachandran et al</rights><rights>2024 Balachandran et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (the “License”), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Notwithstanding the ProQuest Terms and Conditions, you may use this content in accordance with the terms of the License.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c572t-9c3205ba35d7bd5a5b84c80f2d26127d69defb3a353b3b2c38a21f3f2d4340a23</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-4831-9462 ; 0009-0001-9559-0810</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11318872/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11318872/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,864,885,2100,2926,23865,27923,27924,53790,53792,79371,79372</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/39133754$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><contributor>Sergi, Giuseppe</contributor><creatorcontrib>Balachandran, Anoop T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Orange, Samuel T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Yipeng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lustin, Renee</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vega, Andy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Quiles, Norberto</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of two popular transducers to measure sit-to-stand power in older adults</title><title>PloS one</title><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><description>The Tendo Unit (TU) and GymAware (GA) are the two most frequently used linear transducers for assessing muscle power in older adults via the sit-to-stand (STS) test. Unlike TU, GA incorporates a sensor mechanism to correct for non-vertical movements, which may lead to systematic differences between devices. The aim of this study therefore was to compare GA to TU for measuring STS power in community-dwelling older adults. Community-dwelling adults (n = 51, aged ≥65 years, 61% female) completed a single chair stand, with peak power measured simultaneously using GA and TU. Participants also completed the pneumatic leg press, 8-Foot Up and Go (TUG) test, Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB), and self-reported measures of physical function. Intraclass correlations (ICC) were used to assess agreement, and Pearson's correlations were used to assess correlations. The study protocol was prospectively registered on the Open Science Framework. In alignment with our pre-registered hypothesis, peak power demonstrated an ICC of 0.93 (95% CI: 0.88, 0.96). For secondary aims, both transducers showed a correlation greater than 0.8 compared to pneumatic leg press power. For physical performance outcomes, both TU and GA showed similar correlations, as hypothesized: SPPB (r = 0.29 for TU vs. 0.33 for GA), Chair Stands (r = -0.41 vs. -0.38), TUG Fast (r = -0.53 vs. -0.52), mobility questionnaire (r = 0.52 vs. 0.52) and physical function questionnaire (r = 0.44 vs. 0.43). GA and TU peak power showed a high degree of agreement and similar correlations with physical and self-reported performance measures, suggesting that both methods can be used for assessing STS power in older adults.</description><subject>Adults</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Aged, 80 and over</subject><subject>Analysis</subject><subject>Arthritis</subject><subject>Biology and Life Sciences</subject><subject>Circuit components</subject><subject>Computer and Information Sciences</subject><subject>Correlation</subject><subject>Engineering and Technology</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Independent Living</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Measuring instruments</subject><subject>Medicine and Health Sciences</subject><subject>Muscle Strength - physiology</subject><subject>Muscle, Skeletal - physiology</subject><subject>Older people</subject><subject>People and Places</subject><subject>Physical Sciences</subject><subject>Questionnaires</subject><subject>Research and Analysis Methods</subject><subject>Sitting Position</subject><subject>Software</subject><subject>Standing Position</subject><subject>Transducers</subject><subject>Validity</subject><subject>Velocity</subject><subject>Warm up (exercise)</subject><issn>1932-6203</issn><issn>1932-6203</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>DOA</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkl2L1DAUhoso7rr6D0QLguhFx3y1Ta9kGfwYWFhw1dtwmqQzWdKmJqmr_96M012mshdSSkPO8745eXuy7DlGK0xr_O7aTX4AuxrdoFeIIs4Rf5Cd4oaSoiKIPjxan2RPQrhGqKS8qh5nJ7TBlNYlO82u1q4fwZvghtx1ebxx-ejGyYLPo4chqElqH_Lo8l5DmLzOg4lFdEWIMKjE3mifm6S1Ki1ATTaGp9mjDmzQz-bvWfbt44ev68_FxeWnzfr8opBlTWLRSEpQ2QItVd2qEsqWM8lRRxSpMKlV1SjdtTTVaUtbIikHgjua6owyBISeZS8PvqN1Qcx5BEFRQ0jN0puIzYFQDq7F6E0P_rdwYMTfDee3Anw00mqBuFKMQ5fiqlklO44brSWHugZI_dLk9X4-bWp7raQeUkB2YbqsDGYntu6nwJhizut9v29mB-9-TDpE0ZsgtbUwaDcdGqdVRRlL6Kt_0PuvN1NbSDcwQ-fSwXJvKs45YmVDWNUkanUPlR6leyPT9HQm7S8EbxeCxET9K25hCkFsrr78P3v5fcm-PmJ3GmzcBWenaNwQliA7gNK7ELzu7lLGSOyH_zYNsR9-MQ9_kr04_kN3ottpp38Abwr_EQ</recordid><startdate>20240812</startdate><enddate>20240812</enddate><creator>Balachandran, Anoop T</creator><creator>Orange, Samuel T</creator><creator>Wang, Yipeng</creator><creator>Lustin, Renee</creator><creator>Vega, Andy</creator><creator>Quiles, Norberto</creator><general>Public Library of Science</general><general>Public Library of Science (PLoS)</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>IOV</scope><scope>ISR</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7QL</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7TM</scope><scope>7U9</scope><scope>7X2</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABJCF</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AEUYN</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>ATCPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>D1I</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L6V</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0K</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7N</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>M7S</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PATMY</scope><scope>PDBOC</scope><scope>PIMPY</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PTHSS</scope><scope>PYCSY</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>DOA</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4831-9462</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0009-0001-9559-0810</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20240812</creationdate><title>Comparison of two popular transducers to measure sit-to-stand power in older adults</title><author>Balachandran, Anoop T ; Orange, Samuel T ; Wang, Yipeng ; Lustin, Renee ; Vega, Andy ; Quiles, Norberto</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c572t-9c3205ba35d7bd5a5b84c80f2d26127d69defb3a353b3b2c38a21f3f2d4340a23</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><topic>Adults</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Aged, 80 and over</topic><topic>Analysis</topic><topic>Arthritis</topic><topic>Biology and Life Sciences</topic><topic>Circuit components</topic><topic>Computer and Information Sciences</topic><topic>Correlation</topic><topic>Engineering and Technology</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Independent Living</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Measuring instruments</topic><topic>Medicine and Health Sciences</topic><topic>Muscle Strength - physiology</topic><topic>Muscle, Skeletal - physiology</topic><topic>Older people</topic><topic>People and Places</topic><topic>Physical Sciences</topic><topic>Questionnaires</topic><topic>Research and Analysis Methods</topic><topic>Sitting Position</topic><topic>Software</topic><topic>Standing Position</topic><topic>Transducers</topic><topic>Validity</topic><topic>Velocity</topic><topic>Warm up (exercise)</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Balachandran, Anoop T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Orange, Samuel T</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Yipeng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lustin, Renee</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vega, Andy</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Quiles, Norberto</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Opposing Viewpoints</collection><collection>Gale In Context: Science</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Bacteriology Abstracts (Microbiology B)</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Nucleic Acids Abstracts</collection><collection>Virology and AIDS Abstracts</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Materials Science & Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Sustainability</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural & Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Materials Science Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest Engineering Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Agricultural Science Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Algology Mycology and Protozoology Abstracts (Microbiology C)</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Engineering Database</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Science Database</collection><collection>Materials Science Collection</collection><collection>Publicly Available Content Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>Engineering Collection</collection><collection>Environmental Science Collection</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals</collection><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Balachandran, Anoop T</au><au>Orange, Samuel T</au><au>Wang, Yipeng</au><au>Lustin, Renee</au><au>Vega, Andy</au><au>Quiles, Norberto</au><au>Sergi, Giuseppe</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of two popular transducers to measure sit-to-stand power in older adults</atitle><jtitle>PloS one</jtitle><addtitle>PLoS One</addtitle><date>2024-08-12</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>19</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>e0308808</spage><pages>e0308808-</pages><issn>1932-6203</issn><eissn>1932-6203</eissn><abstract>The Tendo Unit (TU) and GymAware (GA) are the two most frequently used linear transducers for assessing muscle power in older adults via the sit-to-stand (STS) test. Unlike TU, GA incorporates a sensor mechanism to correct for non-vertical movements, which may lead to systematic differences between devices. The aim of this study therefore was to compare GA to TU for measuring STS power in community-dwelling older adults. Community-dwelling adults (n = 51, aged ≥65 years, 61% female) completed a single chair stand, with peak power measured simultaneously using GA and TU. Participants also completed the pneumatic leg press, 8-Foot Up and Go (TUG) test, Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB), and self-reported measures of physical function. Intraclass correlations (ICC) were used to assess agreement, and Pearson's correlations were used to assess correlations. The study protocol was prospectively registered on the Open Science Framework. In alignment with our pre-registered hypothesis, peak power demonstrated an ICC of 0.93 (95% CI: 0.88, 0.96). For secondary aims, both transducers showed a correlation greater than 0.8 compared to pneumatic leg press power. For physical performance outcomes, both TU and GA showed similar correlations, as hypothesized: SPPB (r = 0.29 for TU vs. 0.33 for GA), Chair Stands (r = -0.41 vs. -0.38), TUG Fast (r = -0.53 vs. -0.52), mobility questionnaire (r = 0.52 vs. 0.52) and physical function questionnaire (r = 0.44 vs. 0.43). GA and TU peak power showed a high degree of agreement and similar correlations with physical and self-reported performance measures, suggesting that both methods can be used for assessing STS power in older adults.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Public Library of Science</pub><pmid>39133754</pmid><doi>10.1371/journal.pone.0308808</doi><tpages>e0308808</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4831-9462</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0009-0001-9559-0810</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1932-6203 |
| ispartof | PloS one, 2024-08, Vol.19 (8), p.e0308808 |
| issn | 1932-6203 1932-6203 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_plos_journals_3092274227 |
| source | MEDLINE; DOAJ Directory of Open Access Journals; Public Library of Science (PLoS); EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central; Free Full-Text Journals in Chemistry |
| subjects | Adults Aged Aged, 80 and over Analysis Arthritis Biology and Life Sciences Circuit components Computer and Information Sciences Correlation Engineering and Technology Female Humans Independent Living Male Measuring instruments Medicine and Health Sciences Muscle Strength - physiology Muscle, Skeletal - physiology Older people People and Places Physical Sciences Questionnaires Research and Analysis Methods Sitting Position Software Standing Position Transducers Validity Velocity Warm up (exercise) |
| title | Comparison of two popular transducers to measure sit-to-stand power in older adults |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-13T09%3A14%3A32IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_plos_&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20two%20popular%20transducers%20to%20measure%20sit-to-stand%20power%20in%20older%20adults&rft.jtitle=PloS%20one&rft.au=Balachandran,%20Anoop%20T&rft.date=2024-08-12&rft.volume=19&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=e0308808&rft.pages=e0308808-&rft.issn=1932-6203&rft.eissn=1932-6203&rft_id=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0308808&rft_dat=%3Cgale_plos_%3EA804592469%3C/gale_plos_%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=3092274227&rft_id=info:pmid/39133754&rft_galeid=A804592469&rft_doaj_id=oai_doaj_org_article_08dd48af620746cf819eec8a77aac573&rfr_iscdi=true |