Reliability and Validity of Inertial Sensor Assisted Reaction Time Measurement Tools among Healthy Young Adults

The assessment of movement reaction time (RT) as a sideline assessment is a valuable biomarker for mild TBI or concussion. However, such assessments require controlled laboratory environments, which may not be feasible for sideline testing during a game. Body-worn wearable devices are advantageous a...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inSensors (Basel, Switzerland) Vol. 22; no. 21; p. 8555
Main Authors Harper, Brent, Shiraishi, Michael, Soangra, Rahul
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Basel MDPI AG 01.11.2022
MDPI
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:The assessment of movement reaction time (RT) as a sideline assessment is a valuable biomarker for mild TBI or concussion. However, such assessments require controlled laboratory environments, which may not be feasible for sideline testing during a game. Body-worn wearable devices are advantageous as being cost-effective, easy to don and use, wirelessly transmit data, and ensure unhindered movement performance. This study aimed to develop a Drop-stick Test System (DTS) with a wireless inertial sensor and confirm its reliability for different standing conditions (Foam versus No Foam) and task types (Single versus Dual), and postures (Standing versus sitting). Fourteen healthy young participants (seven females, seven males; age 24.7 ± 2.6 years) participated in this study. The participants were asked to catch a falling stick attached to the sensor during a drop test. Reaction Times (RTs) were calculated from data for each trial from DTS and laboratory camera system (gold standard). Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC 3,k) were computed to determine inter-instrument reliability. The RT measurements from participants using the camera system and sensor-based DTS showed moderate to good inter-instrument reliability with an overall ICC of 0.82 (95% CI 0.78–0.85). Bland–Altman plots and 95% levels of agreement revealed a bias where the DTS underestimated RT by approximately 50 ms.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:1424-8220
1424-8220
DOI:10.3390/s22218555