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.