Two-Minute Step Test of Exercise Capacity: Systematic Review of Procedures, Performance, and Clinimetric Properties.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: The 2-minute step test (TMST) is one of many alternatives for measuring exercise capacity. First introduced in 1999 as part of the Senior Fitness Test, the TMST has the advantage of requiring limited space, only a few minutes' time, and no expensive equipment. These advantages notwithstanding, the test must be clinimetrically sound if it is to be recommended. We sought therefore to summarize the literature addressing TMST performance and measurement properties. METHODS: Relevant literature was identified by searches of 3 electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, and Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health) and hand searches. Inclusion of an article required that it described use of the TMST of Rikli and Jones and that it focused on adults. Articles published in a language other than English were excluded. Studies were abstracted for information on participants, TMST description, and findings. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Thirty articles were deemed appropriate based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. The participants in the studies included community-dwelling healthy older adults and adults with assorted pathologies. Studies described varied methods of conducting the TMST. Among tests in which steps for one side were counted over a full 2 minutes, the mean number of steps among populations ranged from 29.1 for patients with chronic stroke to 110.8 for older osteoporotic women. Numerous reviewed studies provide support for the validity of the TMST. Only one study addressed reliability and none focused on responsiveness. Normative data have been proffered. CONCLUSIONS: The TMST has been widely used since first introduced, albeit not always as originally described. There is considerable evidence for the validity of the test, but its reliability and responsiveness are not yet firmly established.

Pulmonary rehabilitation for respiratory disorders other than chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) is an important therapeutic intervention that should no longer be considered suitable only for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). A strong rationale exists for providing PR to persons with a broad range of respiratory disorders other than COPD. Evidence shows that PR for these patients is feasible, safe and effective. A disease-relevant approach should be undertaken, based on individual patients' needs. Further research is needed to better understand the optimal program content, duration and outcomes measures, to enable diverse patients to achieve maximal benefits of PR.

Pulmonary rehabilitation: WHAT WE KNOW AND WHAT WE NEED TO KNOW.

The multidisciplinary treatment of pulmonary rehabilitation (PR), which includes exercise training, self-management education, and psychosocial and nutritional intervention, is now a standard of care for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and has been incorporated into major guidelines. We must now focus efforts on improving its impact and widening its applicability. What is the direction of PR; where does it fit in the comprehensive care of the COPD patient; and how can clinicians best apply this important intervention? This was the charge of the roundtable discussion, Pulmonary Rehabilitation: Moving Forward, involving 20 experts from North America and Europe, which was convened in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, in early 2008. It is not meant to be an exhaustive review; rather, this report summarizes the roundtable proceedings, while providing direction to best position PR into the continuum of COPD care. By consensus, it was agreed upon that although PR is effective for other chronic respiratory diseases, the discussion focus was COPD since most of the evidence base and patient referral are for this disease. These proceedings provide insight into 3 broad areas appropriate for investigation or implementation: positioning PR in an integrated care model for COPD patients; improving the effectiveness of this intervention; and expanding the recognition, application, and accessibility to PR. It is the hope that this document will provide a catalyst for clinicians, investigators, and healthcare policy makers to help realize these goals as well as serve to suggest important areas for future research and development in PR.