Search

Background: Vestibular Activities and Participation Measure (VAP) subscales assess the effect of vestibular disorders on activity and participation. This study aimed to perform the cross-cultural adaptation and assess the validity, internal consistency, reliability, and measurement error of the Brazilian version of VAP subscales., Methods: The cross-cultural adaptation followed the translation, synthesis, back-translation, review by a committee of experts, and pretesting phases. Structural validity was assessed using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), while Spearman's correlation between VAP subscales and the Dizziness Handicap Inventory (DHI) was used to assess construct validity. Cronbach's alpha measured internal consistency. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) assessed intra- and inter-rater reliability, and measurement error was calculated by using the standard error of measurement (SEM) and minimal detectable change (MDC)., Results: Additional information was included in the Brazilian version of the Vestibular Activities and Participation measure (VAP-BR) after approval by one of the developers of the instrument to improve the understanding among individuals. One factor was found in the EFA for each subscale with 50% explained variance. Regarding CFA, the subscales 1 (S1) and 2 (S2) presented, respectively, adequate model fit indices (ie, comparative fit index of 0.99 and 0.97, and standardized root mean square residual of 0.04 for both subscales), but a very low factor load in item 6 of S1 (0.08). Chronbach's alpha was 0.80 (S1) and 0.82 (S2). For intra-rater assessment, the S1 and S2 presented an ICC of 0.87 and 0.90, SEM of 0.01 and 1.16, and MDC of 0.39 and 0.46, respectively. When assessed by 2 different raters, SEM values were 1.03 and 1.53, and MDC values were 2.85 and 4.23 for S1 and S2, respectively; both subscales showed an ICC of 0.92. Correlations between DHI and VAP subscales presented coefficients above 0.57., Conclusion: The Brazilian version of VAP subscales presents good measurement properties and may assist health professionals in identifying activity limitations and participation restrictions in individuals with vestibular disorders., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Background and Purpose: The Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) is widely used for older adults since it has a high level of validity, reliability, and responsiveness in measuring function in this population. However, only a few studies of diagnostic accuracy have assessed SPPB capacity in detecting frailty and prefrailty by estimating more detailed measurement properties. Thus, the present study aimed to evaluate the SPPB's diagnostic accuracy in detecting frailty and prefrailty, in addition to identifying cut-off points for walking time and chair stand time., Methods: This is a cross-sectional study composed of 786 community-dwelling older adults 60 years or older, in which sociodemographic and anthropometric data, frailty phenotype, and total SPPB score, as well as walking time and chair stand time, were assessed. Analysis of a receiver operating characteristic curve was performed to identify the cut-off point, sensitivity, and specificity in the total SPPB score, as well as the walking time and chair stand time for frailty and prefrailty screening. Accuracy and positive and negative predictive values were subsequently calculated., Results and Discussion: The cut-off points identified for the total SPPB score, walking time, and chair stand time were 9 points or less (accuracy of 72.6%), 5 seconds or less, and 13 seconds or less, respectively, for frailty screening and 11 points or less (accuracy of 58.7%), 4 seconds or less, and 10 seconds or less, respectively, for prefrailty screening. The walking time showed greater frailty discriminatory capacity compared with the chair stand time (effect size = 1.24 vs 0.64; sensitivity = 69% vs 59%; and specificity = 84% vs 75%)., Conclusions: The total SPPB score has good diagnostic accuracy to discriminate between nonfrail and frail older adults using a cut-off point of 9 or less, being better to identify the true negatives (older adults who are not frail). Although the SPPB's diagnostic accuracy measures for detecting prefrailty were low to moderate, this instrument can help in screening prefrail older adults from the cutoff point of 11 or less in the total SPPB score. Identification of prefrail older adults enables implementing early treatment in this target audience and can prevent their advance to frailty., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2022 APTA Geriatrics, An Academy of the American Physical Therapy Association.)