SUBJECTS
description
Transcript of SUBJECTS
Reliability of the Fullerton Advanced Balance Scale
Click Fenter P, Dupree L, Harris C, Koonce K, Teat A.
Program in Physical Therapy
SUBJECTS30 community-dwelling adults
volunteers ages 58-81 age was 69.5 ± 6.3x
Fullerton Advanced Balance Scale
METHODS
Consent, demographics and the Physical Activity Questionnaire, (PAQ) was administered to the volunteers before testing. The FAB was administered to the participants with the tasks tested in random order while being videotaped. Each tester and videographer assessed the physical performance on the test and ranked performance. At least two to three weeks later, the video tapes were reviewed by the four raters (four 3rd year DPT students) and performance was rated again according to the FAB criteria. Comparison of scores were made to determine the reliability of this balance test.
Fullerton Advanced Balance Scale
RESULTS
Inter-rater and intra-rater reliability were established by utilizing the Pearson’s correlation coefficient. The inter-rater reliability correlation was determined to be 0.994 for raters 1-2 and 0.937 for raters 3-4. The intra-rater reliability correlation was found to be 0.940 overall for the raters.
Fullerton Advanced Balance Scale
CONCLUSION
The FAB is a valuable tool that is easy to administer to a variety of ages and in different types of settings. Since the mean total FAB scores have both inter-rater and intra-rater reliabilities, we can conclude that the Fullerton Advanced Balance Scale is a reliable measure of some activity in our study. Additionally third year DPT students can perform this balance test safely and accurately.
Fullerton Advanced Balance Scale
Effects of animal-assisted therapy (AAT) on emergent literacy skills of preschool children with language
disorders
Sandra Hayes, Jessica Brownell, Clifton Frilot, Merrie Pendergrass, and
Darla Rakoczy
Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center-Shreveport
Speech-Language Pathology Program
SUBJECTS
ten 3-5 year olds who exhibited a language and/or articulation disorder
Animal Assisted Therapy
METHODS
The participants were randomly chosen to one of two treatment groups. Both groups received one thirty minute session of emergent literacy treatment, but Treatment Group 1 had a R.E.A.D. certified dog present (Condition A). Treatment Group 2 did not (Condition B). Two tests were administered pre- and post-treatment.
Animal Assisted Therapy
LESSONS
Animal Assisted Therapy
RESULTS
Statistical analysis showed no significant difference in scores between the two groups; this may have been due to a small number of participants. Averaged differences between the two groups’ pre- and post-treatment scores were calculated and compared. These results showed improvement for both groups. In addition, Group 1 (w/dog) required 50% fewer redirections per session than Group 2 (w/o dog).
Animal Assisted Therapy
The Choice of Residency: Factors Influencing an
Individual’s Selection of a Physical Therapy
Residency ProgramLisanne R. Meiners, PT, DPT
Marla Jordan, SPTHannah Lowe, SPT
Department of Physical Therapy
APTA Credential Requirements
Background
Purpose
INTRODUCTION
Participants
Study Design
Data Collection
METHODS
283 participants (93%return)
Factors:1. Geographical Location/
Cost of Living2. Salary/Benefits/
Paid Time Off3. Prestige of Program4. Working with Advanced
Clinically Experienced Physical Therapists/Mentors
5. Perceived Collaborative Team Spirit/Positive Morale
RESULTS
6. Happiness/Satisfaction of Current/Past Residents
7. Commitment to Residents
8. Time in Classroom vs. Clinical Setting
9. Patient Diversity10.Opportunity to Mentor
Other Physical Therapists/Physical Therapy Students
GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION/COST OF LIVING
Common themes:• Current city or location of residence • Family responsibilities• Cost of living • Availability of residency specialty• City or location preference • Online residency program
VERY IMPORTANT
42%(n=119) FAIRLY
IMPORTANT31.8%(n=90)
16.3%(n=46)
NOT IMPORTANT9.9%
(n=28)
SLIGHTLY IMPORTANT
VERY IMPOR-TANT33.6%(n=95)
Common themes: • The differences in pay between current job and residency program• Student loan payment considerations • Paid time off • Benefits • Residency paid for and/or provided by current employer• Online residency program• Geography/current location
FAIRLY IMPORTANT
37.1%(n=105)
19.8% (n=56)
SLIGHTLY IMPORTANT
NOT IMPORTANT9.5% (n=27)
SALARY/BENEFITS/PAID TIME OFF
Common themes:• Well-known and highly regarded program • APTA accredited with graduated residents • Program that was best fit for the resident• Working with clinically advanced physical therapists and mentors• Passing rate of specialty exam
VERY IMPORTANT
44.5%(n=127)
FAIRLY IMPORTANT
37.8%(n=107)
NOT IMPORTANT4.9%
(n=14)
SLIGHTLY IMPORTANT
13.1%(n=37)
PRESTIGE OF PROGRAM
Common themes:• Working alongside well experienced mentors
VERY IMPORTANT
92.2%(n=261)
FAIRLY IMPORTANT7.4%
(n=21)
SLIGHTLY IMPORTANT0.4% (n=1)
WORKING WITH ADVANCED CLINICALLY EXPERIENCED
PHYSICAL THERAPISTS/MENTORS
Common themes:• Impression of program at interview• Collaboration within the program• Support within the program
VERY IMPORTANT
54.8%(n=155)
FAIRLY IMPORTANT
35.0%(n=99)
NOT IMPORTANT1.8% (n=5)
SLIGHTLY IMPORTANT
7.8%(n=22)
PERCEIVED COLLABORATIVE TEAM SPIRIT/ POSITIVE
MORALE
Common themes:• Perceived collaborative team spirit and positive morale within the program
VERY IMPORTANT
50.9%(n=144)
FAIRLY IMPORTANT
36.4%(n=103)
NOT IMPORTANT5.7% (n=16)
SLIGHTLY IMPORTANT
6.0%(n=17)
HAPPINESS/SATISFACTION OF CURRENT/PAST
RESIDENTS
VERY IMPORTANT
72.8%(n=206)
FAIRLY IMPORTANT
22.3% (n=63)
NOT IMPORTANT1.4% (n=4)
SLIGHTLY IMPORTANT
2.1%(n=6)
Common themes:• Perceived collaborative team spirit and positive morale within the program
COMMITMENT TO RESIDENTS
Common themes:• Greater time in classroom setting• Greater time in clinical setting• Equal time in both classroom and clinical settings• Opportunity to mentor other physical therapists and physical therapy students
VERY IMPORTANT
33.9%(n=96)
FAIRLY IMPORTANT
57.2%(n=162)
NOT IMPORTANT2.5% (n=7)
SLIGHTLY IMPORTANT
6.7%(n=19)
TIME IN CLASSROOM VS. CLINICAL SETTING
No true common themes noted.
VERY IMPORTANT
29.3% (n=83)
FAIRLY IMPORTANT
48.8%(n=138)
NOT IMPORTANT5.3% (n=15)
SLIGHTLY IMPORTANT
15.9% (n=45)
PATIENT DIVERSITY
Common themes:• Teaching physical therapy students in a clinical setting • No desire to mentor
VERY IMPORTANT
20.8% (n=59)
FAIRLY IMPORTANT
43.8%(n=124)
NOT IMPORTANT10.2% (n=29)
SLIGHTLY IMPORTANT
25.4%(n=72)
OPPORTUNITY TO MENTOR OTHER PHYSICAL THERAPISTS/ PHYSICAL THERAPY STUDENTS
Most and Least Important
Limitations
Future Research
CONCLUSION
Current and past residents of LSU Health Shreveport
Program directors and current and past residents across the United States
Kendra Harrington, APTA residency certification liaison
DPT Students: Marla Jordan and Hannah Lowe
LPTA
Special Thanks…
Psychophysical and Physiological Variables During Dynamic Lift Testing in Functional Capacity Evaluations
Marie Vazquez Morgan PT PhDDaniel Herring and Blake Carriere
Intro
• What are FCEs?– Tests designed to assess the ability of a worker to
perform his/her duties.
• Why are FCEs necessary?– MSDs– $140 billion per year– Gouttebarge et al (2005)
Purpose
• Assess the changes in physiological and psychophysical variables in relation to a maximal effort during a dynamic lifting test.
• Guiding Questions:1. How does %heart rate (HR) increase compare with
lifting and Rating of Perceived Exertion (RPE)?2. Is there a psychophysical relationship (HR change
and RPE)?
Hypothesis
• Researchers hypothesized that as the load being lifted increased in weight, both %HR change and RPE would increase linearly.
Methods
• Materials– Niosh Box– Polar HR monitor– Borg Scale printout
Methods (cont)
• 27 first and second year DPT students• 6 males, 21 females• 21-35 yo• Exclusion criteria
– Beta Blockers– Pregnancy– Hernia or recent surgery– Other medical complications restricting lifting
Methods (cont.)• BMI
• RHR
• Participant educated on floor-to-waist lift
• Participant performed lift– Initial lift was 20 pounds increasing by 10
lb increments.– Peak HR and RPE assessed after each lift.
• Termination– Psychophysical– Biomechanical– Max load lifted
Statistical Analysis
• Pearson r correlation
• P= 0.05
• r ≥ 0.381
Results
• Statistically Insignificant– Peak HR vs RPE– Peak %HR change vs RPE– BMI vs max load lifted
• Statistically Significant– %HR change vs RPE– %HR change vs load– RPE vs load– RPE @ peak HR vs RPE @ termination
Figure 1
0 2 4 6 8 10 120
20
40
60
80
100
120
f(x) = 3.69465432632049 x + 47.3022617673509R² = 0.32076468301842
RPE vs %HR Change
Series1Linear (Series1)
RPE
%HR
Cha
nge
Figure 2
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 1600
20
40
60
80
100
120
f(x) = 0.286457479749672 x + 44.4624253982988R² = 0.258902407505486
Load vs %HR Change
Series1Linear (Series1)
Load (pounds)
%HR
Cha
nge
Figure 3
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 1600
2
4
6
8
10
12
f(x) = 0.0602771857400245 x + 0.23014670157144R² = 0.487846022921837
Load vs RPE
Series1Linear (Series1)
Load
RPE
Figure 4
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 110
2
4
6
8
10
12
f(x) = 0.917077986179664 x + 0.814412635735439R² = 0.79697422746577
RPE @Peak HR vs RPE @ Termination*
Series1Linear (Series1)
@ peak HR
@ T
erm
Results (cont)Male Female
Peak HR 129.7 131.2
Peak %HR change 74.5 75.8
Peak RPE 6.8 7.5
Peak load 128.3 75.7
BMI 24.5 22.1
Figure 5
Conclusion
• %HR change and RPE appear to be valid indicators of exertion during FCE dynamic lift testing.
• Ideas for future studies– Increase sample size– Equal number of m and f– Wider range of age and BMI– Alter exclusion criteria
References1. Gouttebarge, V., Kuijer, P., Wind, H. (2009). Criterion-related Validity of Functional Capacity Evaluation
Lifting Tests on Future Work Disability Risk and Return to Work in the Construction Industry. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 66, 657-663.
2. Jay, M. A. et al (2000). Sensitivity and Specificity of the Indicators of Sincere Effort of the EPIC Lift Capacity Test on a Previously Injured Population. SPINE, 25(11), 1405-1412.
3. Hazard RG, Reid S, Fenwick J, Reeves V. Isokinetic trunk and lifting strength measurements: Variability as an indicator of effort. SPINE, 1988; 13:54-7.
4. Borg, G. (1973). Perceived exertion: A note on history & methods. Med Sci Sports, 5, 90-93.5. Borg, G. (1982). Psychophysical bases of perceived exertion. Med Sci Sports, 14, 377-381.6. Skinner, J., Hutsler, R., Bergstrinova, V. et al. (1973).The validity and reliability of a rating scale of
perceived exertion. Med Sci Sports, 5, 94-96.7. Robertson, R. (1982). Central signals of perceived exertion during dynamic exercise. Med Sci Sports, 14,
382-389.8. Cafarelli, E. (1982). Peripheral contributions to the perception of effort. Med Sci Sports, 14, 382-389.9. Cooper, D., Grimby, G., Jones, D. et al. (1979). Perception of effort in isometric and dynamic muscular
contraction. Eur J Applied Physiol, 41, 173-180.10. Smutok, M., Skrinar, G., Pandolf, K. (1980). Exercise intensity: Subjective regulation by perceived
exertion. Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 61, 569-574.11. Vazquez Morgan, M., Allison, Steve., Duhon, Damian. Heart Rate Changes I Functional Capacity
Evaluations in a Workers’ Compensation Population. Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, School of Allied Health Professions, Program in Physical Therapy; Tri-State OCCFIT Physical Therapy Inc.