6-Clicks: A Case Study

Introduction

Screening tools were developed for different reasons like identifying/assessing problems, preventing negative impact, or predicting an outcome. They must be free of bias and distortion that is why their reliability and validity must be assessed. Reliability is when the screening tool yield the same result and validity is the degree of the tool to measure what is intended to measure (Roach, 2006). In this paper, I will discuss about the reliability and validity of two screening tools, “6-Clicks” and gait speed, which I utilize in my practice at an acute care hospital setting.

“6-Clicks”

Acute care hospital-based physical therapists and occupational therapists primary focus is to evaluate patient’s mobility and self-care abilities to determine the need for skilled care, which influences discharge planning (Jette et al., 2014a). An adequate discharge planning improves the efficiency of care and reduces costs by transitioning patients, in a timely manner, to the next appropriate level of care (Jette et al., 2014a). According to Jette et al. (2014a), to reduce delays in discharge from the expensive

A number of poor health outcomes including hospitalization, falls, nursing home placement, mobility disability and mortality are associated with a declined gait speed (Graham, Ostic, Fisher, & Ottenbacher, 2008). There is considerable variation in gait speed testing procedures including pace, protocol and distance however, all versions of these short, distance-based walk tests have high (>0.90) test-retest and inter-rater reliabilities (Graham et al., 2008). Kim, Park, Lee, and Lee (2016) reported that the validity of gait speed with normal pace was higher compared with maximal pace against physical function. Lower extremity function is reflected in short, distance-based assessments while longer, time-based walks (e.g. the 6-minute walk) are measures of fitness rather than functional performance (Graham et al.,