Reliability and validity of a mobile tablet for assessing left/right judgements. (April 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Williams, Lindy J.; Braithwaite, Felicity A.; Leake, Hayley B.; McDonnell, Michelle N.; Peto, Daniela K.; Lorimer Moseley, G.; Hillier, Susan L.
• Is Part Of: Musculoskeletal science and practice. Volume 40(2019)
• Page Start: 45
• Page End: 52
• Publication Date: 2019-04
• Subjects: left/right judgement -- Motor imagery -- Body schema -- Concurrent validity; Manipulation (Therapeutics) -- Periodicals; Physical therapy -- Periodicals; Neuromuscular diseases -- Treatment -- Periodicals; Musculoskeletal system -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Manipulation (Therapeutics); Neuromuscular diseases -- Treatment; Physical therapy; Manipulation, Orthopedic; Musculoskeletal Diseases -- therapy; Neuromuscular Diseases -- therapy; Physical Therapy Modalities; Electronic journals; Periodicals; 615.82
• DOI: 10.1016/j.msksp.2019.01.010
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2468-8630

Abstract

Abstract: Background: Left/right judgement (LRJ) of body parts is commonly used to assess the ability to perform implicit motor imagery and the integrity of brain-grounded maps of the body. Clinically, LRJ are often undertaken using a mobile tablet, but the concurrent validity and reliability of this approach has not yet been established. Objectives: To evaluate the concurrent validity and test-retest reliability of a mobile tablet for assessing LRJ. Method: Participants completed LRJ for 50 hand images (Experiment 1), and 40 back, foot, or neck images (Experiment 2) using a mobile tablet and desktop computer in random order. Participants in Experiment 2 performed a repeat test the following day to assess test-retest reliability. Accuracy and response time (RT) were recorded. Results: Twenty participants aged 55.3 (±6.7) years in Experiment 1, and 37 participants aged 38.2 (±12.3) years in Experiment 2, were recruited. Concurrent validity of the mobile tablet was good to excellent for hand judgements (ICC3, 1 = 0.836 for RT; ICC = 0.909 for accuracy), and was good for back, foot, and neck judgements (ICC = 0.781 for accuracy; ICC = 0.880 for RT). Test-retest reliability of the mobile tablet was good to excellent (ICC = 0.824 for accuracy; ICC = 0.903 for RT). Conclusions: The mobile tablet demonstrated good to excellent concurrent validity with the desktop computer in two separate samples. The mobile tablet also demonstrated good to excellent test-retest reliability. The mobile tablet for LRJ is a valid alternative to the original desktop version. Highlights: Tablet version of hand, foot & back left/right judgement task is valid and reliable. Minimal detectable difference for LRJ of the hand, foot, back & neck are presented. Repeated measurements of neck LRJ scores should be interpreted with caution.