A Comparative Study of the Five-TimesSit-to-Stand and Timed-Up-and-Go Tests as Measures of Functional Mobility in Persons with and without Injection-Related Venous Ulcers

PURPOSE: To provide information on the Five-Times-Sit-to-Stand (FTSTS) and Timed-Up-and-Go (TUG) tests in persons with injection-related venous ulcers (VU+) and persons without venous ulcers (VU-). TARGET AUDIENCE: This continuing education activity is intended for physicians and nurses with an interest in skin and wound care. OBJECTIVES: After participating in this educational activity, the participant should be better able to: Identify the methods used in a comparative study of the FTSTS and TUG tests in persons with and without injection-related venous ulcers. Evaluate results from this and other studies evaluating the use of the FTSTS and TUG tests for use in clinical practice. ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE: To examine functional mobility using Five-Times-Sit-to-Stand (FTSTS) and Timed-Up-and-Go (TUG) tests in persons with injection-related venous ulcers (VU+) and compare these findings to persons without venous ulcers (VU-). DESIGN: Cross-sectional, comparative design. SETTING: Outpatient clinic. PARTICPANTS: Participants (n = 61) were 31 persons VU+ and 30 persons VU-; 57.4% men; mean age, 54 years; 93% African American. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Five-Times-Sit-to-Stand, TUG, physical activity, quality of life, comorbidities, falls, and body mass index. RESULTS: Participants VU+ were 36.8% slower on completion of the TUG test (P = .012) and 26.5% slower on completion of the FTSTS test (P = .081). Five-Times-Sit-to-Stand and TUG were strongly correlated with each other, r = 0.93, 0.87, P < .001 for VU- and VU+, respectively. Test-retest reliabilities for the FTSTS and TUG tests were high (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.89-0.94) for the VU+ and VU-. Within each group, correlations of FTSTS and TUG were similar for each of the variables examined. Across groups, correlations showed that the time to complete FTSTS and TUG increased as a function of comorbidities in the VU+ group; the correlations in the VU- group were not significantly different from zero. CONCLUSIONS: The VU+ group exhibited poorer physical performance than the VU- group. The high correlation between FTSTS and TUG and the similarity of correlations with other variables suggest that these physical performance measures may be interchangeable in their ability to predict physical functioning in these clinical groups despite differences in test demands. Clinicians need easy-to-perform reliable clinical tests such as FTSTS and TUG to assess mobility of aging injection users with venous ulcers.