Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 25, 2026

Author Spotlight: Insights into Remotely Supervised Neuromodulation Procedure for Phantom Limb Pain
Published on: March 1, 2024
Comparing Remotely Supervised, Self-Administered, and Center-Based Sit-to-Stand Tests in Individuals With Chronic
Lee Verweel1,2, Matisse LeBouedec2, Adam Benoit2
1Mr. Verweel, Dr. Newman, Packham, Dr. Goldstein, and Dr. Brooks are affiliated with School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.
Sit-to-stand (STS) tests for chronic respiratory disease (CRD) showed no performance differences between center, remote, and home settings. Remotely supervised and self-administered STS tests are safe and acceptable alternatives.
Area of Science:
- Pulmonary Rehabilitation
- Clinical Exercise Physiology
- Respiratory Medicine
Background:
- Limited evidence exists comparing center-based and home-based sit-to-stand (STS) tests in individuals with chronic respiratory disease (CRD).
- This study addresses the need to evaluate agreement and performance differences between center-based, remotely supervised, and self-administered STS tests in CRD patients.
Purpose of the Study:
- To estimate the level of agreement between center-based, remotely supervised, and self-administered STS tests.
- To determine performance differences in STS tests across these three conditions in individuals with CRD.
- To assess the safety and acceptability of remotely supervised and self-administered STS tests.
Main Methods:
- A repeated-measures design compared 30-second and 1-minute STS tests across three conditions: center-based, remotely supervised, and self-administered.
- Bland-Altman analysis was used to assess agreement, reporting mean difference and 95% limits of agreement (LoA).
- Analysis of variance (ANOVA) evaluated performance differences, controlling for testing order. Safety and acceptability were secondary outcomes.
Main Results:
- Twenty-seven participants with CRD completed all test conditions.
- Bland-Altman analysis showed limited bias (mean difference < 1 repetition) but considerable individual variation (LoA for 30-s STS: -3.4 to 4.1; 1-min STS: -7.4 to 8.6).
- ANOVA revealed no significant effect of test condition on STS performance (P = .12 for 30-s, P = .33 for 1-min), although order effects were observed (P = .005 for both). No serious adverse events occurred, and most participants found the remote/self-administered tests clear, safe, and confidence-inspiring.
Conclusions:
- Sit-to-stand test performance does not significantly differ across center-based, remotely supervised, and self-administered conditions in individuals with CRD.
- Remotely supervised and self-administered STS tests demonstrate potential as safe and acceptable alternatives for assessing physical function in CRD patients.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
Smoking is a primary risk factor for COPD, with over 80% of patients having a history of it. Patients typically experience progressive dyspnea or labored breathing, frequent coughing, and recurrent pulmonary infections. Many eventually succumb to respiratory failure, characterized by...
Chronic Kidney Disease I: Introduction
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease-I: Introduction
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease-V: Management
Smoking Cessation
Chronic Kidney Disease II: Clinical Manifestations
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease-II: Pathophysiology
Chronic Inflammation

