• Development of a dual task int...

*Result*: Development of a dual task interference assessment tool: evaluating test-retest reliability and concurrent validity in community-dwelling older adults.

Title:
Development of a dual task interference assessment tool: evaluating test-retest reliability and concurrent validity in community-dwelling older adults.
Authors:
Bayar B; Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University, Faculty of Health Sciences, Department of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation, Muğla, Turkey. Electronic address: bbayar@mu.edu.tr., Canan Pakeloğlu A; Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University, Institute of Health Sciences, Department of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation, Muğla, Turkey. Electronic address: aysencanan95@gmail.com., Koç M; Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University, Faculty of Health Sciences, Department of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation, Muğla, Turkey. Electronic address: meltemkoc@mu.edu.tr., Doğu E; Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University, Faculty of Science, Department of Statistics, Muğla, Turkey. Electronic address: eralp.dogu@mu.edu.tr., Aydoğmuş H; Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Muğla, Turkey., Bayar K; Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University, Faculty of Health Sciences, Department of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation, Muğla, Turkey. Electronic address: kbayar@mu.edu.tr.
Source:
Geriatric nursing (New York, N.Y.) [Geriatr Nurs] 2026 Mar; Vol. 68, pp. 103771. Date of Electronic Publication: 2026 Jan 02.
Publication Type:
Journal Article
Language:
English
Journal Info:
Publisher: Mosby-Yearbook Country of Publication: United States NLM ID: 8309633 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1528-3984 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 01974572 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Geriatr Nurs Subsets: MEDLINE
Imprint Name(s):
Publication: St Louis Mo : Mosby-Yearbook
Original Publication: [New York : American Journal of Nursing Co.
MeSH Terms:
Cognitive Dysfunction*/physiopathology , Geriatric Assessment*/methods , Independent Living* , Task Performance and Analysis*, Humans ; Aged ; Female ; Male ; Reproducibility of Results ; Aged, 80 and over ; Postural Balance ; Lower Extremity ; Upper Extremity
Contributed Indexing:
Keywords: Cognitive impairment; Dual; Motor function; Older adults; Task
Entry Date(s):
Date Created: 20260103 Date Completed: 20260218 Latest Revision: 20260218
Update Code:
20260219
DOI:
10.1016/j.gerinurse.2025.103771
PMID:
41483567
Database:
MEDLINE

*Further Information*

*This study aimed to develop and evaluate the reliability and concurrent validity of the Dual Task Interference Assessment Tool (DTIT) in community-dwelling older adults. A total of 93 participants (42 with cognitive decline and 51 without) were assessed using the DTIT, which evaluates dual-task abilities across four domains: upper extremity, lower extremity, balance, and functional mobility. Motor tasks included cup stacking, tandem gait, step block, and the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test, while cognitive tasks involved serial subtraction, word generation, counting backward by months, and Reciting Alternate Letters (RAL). Motor (mDTE) and cognitive (cogDTE) dual-task interference were calculated for each task. Significant group differences were observed in all DTIT subscales, except for the mDTE of DTIT_Lower Extremity (p = 0.308). Test-retest analyses demonstrated excellent reliability for all DTIT subscales, with no significant learning effect between sessions (p > 0.05). Strong concurrent validity was confirmed by significant correlations between DTIT_Upper Extremity and NHPT, DTIT_Balance and the Functional Reach Test, and DTIT_Lower Extremity/Functional Mobility and walking speed (p < 0.05). The DTIT is the first instrument to comprehensively assess dual-task interference in older adults, with and without cognitive decline. Thanks to its robust psychometric properties, it can be used as a practical clinical and research tool to identify dual-task difficulties and monitor rehabilitation outcomes.
(Copyright © 2025 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)*

*Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.*