Search

Emerging technologies such as robotics and virtual reality (VR) are being trialled and implemented into physiotherapy practice. As emerging technologies compete for market share, trials on emerging technologies are at risk of spin. For consumers to make informed decisions about whether to use a new technology, trials should accurately portray the results. If spin is present, outcomes may not be comparable to the results reported when interventions are implemented clinically. To determine the amount and type of spin in abstracts of physiotherapy clinical trials that use robotic or VR interventions. A secondary objective is to determine the agreement between raters, both experienced and inexperienced, using an existing 7-item checklist with updated item definitions. We will perform two meta-research reviews on a random set of 100 robotics (study 1) and 100 VR (study 2) trials, from any year, indexed in the PEDro database. Using the updated spin checklist, the abstract of each trial will be assessed in corroboration with full-text. The total spin score and proportion of studies with spin for each item will be reported. Agreement between experienced and inexperienced raters will be determined using kappa statistics. Rater confidence in rating each item will be collected. We will identify if spin is present in robotics and VR literature and evaluate if the spin checklist can be confidently and consistently used by raters. We hope this research will facilitate best-practice reporting of research findings so emerging technologies will be implemented with realistic expectation of clinical outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The objective of the current study was to determine the test-retest reliability of heel-to-toe progression measures in the stance phase of gait using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) analysis. It has been proposed that heel-to-toe progression could be used as a functional measure of ankle muscle contracture/weakness in clinical populations. This was the first study to investigate the test-retest reliability of this measure. Eighteen healthy subjects walked over the GAITRite® mat three times at a comfortable speed on two sessions (≥ 48 hours apart). The reliability of the heel-to-toe progression measures; heel-contact time, mid-stance time and propulsive time were assessed. Also assessed were basic temporal-spatial parameters; velocity, cadence, stride length, step length, stride width, single and double leg support time. Reliability was determined using the ICC(3,1) model and, fixed and proportional biases, and measures of variability were assessed. Basic gait temporal-spatial parameters were not different between sessions (p > 0.05) and had excellent reliability (ICC(3,1) range: 0.871–0.953) indicating that subjects walked similarly between sessions. Measurement of heel-to-toe progression variables were not different between sessions (p > 0.05) and had excellent reliability (ICC(3,1) range: 0.845–0.926). However, these were less precise and more variable than the measurement of standard temporal-spatial gait variables. As the current study was performed on healthy populations, it represents the ‘best case’ scenario. The increased variability and reduced precision of heel-to-toe progression measurements should be considered if being used in clinical populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]