A study of the validity of the Six

The aim of this study was to evaluate the concurrent and divergent validity of the Six-Spot Step Test in mild to moderately impaired people with Parkinson’s disease. Cross-sectional cohort study. Outpatient clinics. Fifty-eight people with Parkinson’s disease. The Six-Spot Step Test, the Timed “Up and Go” test, the mini-Balance Evaluation Systems Test (mini-BESTest), and postural sway were tested on the same day, and the Spearman’s Rank Correlation Coefficient (ρ) was used for data analysis. Subjects had a median age of 68？years (Q1–Q3: 62–73), a median Hoehn and Yahr score of 2.5 (Q1–Q3: 2–3), a median Six-Spot Step Test score of 7.9？seconds (Q1–Q3: 6.5–9.2), a median Timed “Up and Go” test score of 7.0？seconds (Q1–Q3: 5.6–7.9), a median mini-BESTest score of 22.5 (Q1–Q3: 19.8–25.0), and a median postural sway score of 27.9？mm2 (Q1–Q3: 15.0–53.5) and 22.5？mm/s (Q1–Q3: 14.6–39.8). Statistical significant correlations were found between the Six-Spot Step Test and the Timed “Up and Go” test (ρ？=？0.81) and the mini-BESTest (ρ？=？–0.64), whereas no significant relations were identified between the Six-Spot Step Test and postural sway (ρ？=？0.18, P？>？0.05). In patients with Parkinson’s disease, the Six-Spot Step Test showed promising concurrent validity to other recommended clinical tests for encompassing balance capacity and capacity of functional mobility, making it a reasonable and easily administered alternative to existing assessment tools when measuring walking agility. As expected, weak correlates to postural sway revealed that the Six-Spot Step test is not a valid measure of standing balance