Objective turning measures improve diagnostic accuracy and relate to real-world mobility/combat readiness in chronic mild traumatic brain injury

INTRODUCTION

Balance and mobility problems are common consequences after mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI), with variable presentations depending on the specific cognitive, motor, and sensory demands of the task as well as personal and injury factors of the individual with mTBI (1, 2). Consequently, results from objective assessments of balance and mobility are important clinical tools that can inform rehabilitation prescription and track recovery over time. Capturing deficits after mTBI and understanding their impact on a patient’s life requires assessments of mobility that reflect the demands of daily living. While extensive literature on dual-task (DT) gait, where mobility tasks are combined with a simultaneous cognitive task to mirror everyday life, demonstrates diagnostic utility in people with mTBI (3–8), these tasks are often limited to straight-line walking and artificial, laboratory-based cognitive tasks such as serial 3 subtraction. Other multi-faceted clinical assessment batteries such as the Functional Gait Assessment (FGA) (9), High-level Mobility Assessment Tool (HiMAT) (10, 11), 4-Item Hybrid Assessment of Mobility for mTBI (HAM-4-mTBI) (12), and mini Balance Evaluation Systems Test (mini-BESTest) (13) include a variety of mobility tasks, such as walking with horizontal head turns, running, bounding, and reactive stepping with varying motor demands. The majority of individual test items within these general measures of mobility similarly focus on straight-line walking. Non-straight locomotion and ambulatory turning to navigate complex environments are rarely assessed in clinical tests of function after mTBI. Recognizing that work has begun to identify more complex and ecologically relevant tasks such as the Assessment of Military Multitasking Performance (AMMP) (14, 15), and more recently the Portable Warrior Test of Tactical Agility (POWAR-TOTAL) (16) that may contribute to return to duty decisions in the military, tasks that identify issues with key components of everyday mobility such as those involving turning may provide important discriminatory ability for individuals with persistent deficits affecting function in a targeted fashion.

Ambulatory turning is an important characteristic of daily mobility as individuals inevitably must navigate through complex environments that do not permit straight-line travel. Approximately 40% of all steps are non-straight steps involving some degree of turning (17). Stable turning requires anticipatory postural control (18), asymmetrical loading across limbs (19), and dynamic reweighting of sensory information to account for time-varying gravitoinertial accelerations (20, 21). As turning is often enacted to get to a target object or location, people also reorient their gaze and stabilize visual information using sophisticated oculomotor and vestibulo-ocular reflexes, and use sequential rotations of the head, trunk, pelvis, and feet to reorient to the new direction of travel (22–24). These characteristics of turning are unique from straight gait, and models of mobility should include turning as a factor that is independent from other traditional measures of gait such as pace, rhythm, and variability (25, 26).

Preliminary work in a sample of individuals with persisting balance-related symptoms after mTBI (i.e., chronic mTBI) demonstrated slower turning speeds and more variable head-on-body coordination when walking along a complex turning course simulating turns performed in daily life (27). Other studies have reported abnormal balance control during turning in otherwise asymptomatic athletes recovering from mTBI (28). When selecting an optimized set of clinical items from the FGA and HiMAT, the Gait with Pivot Turn test item from the FGA was one of only four test items retained for use in populations with chronic mTBI (12). These studies suggest assessments of turning may have clinical value in populations with mTBI. However, such results leave ambiguity over which assessment of turning, and which variables, are most relevant for assessing and monitoring people with mTBI. The clinical value of turning may depend on the specific demands, instructions, and outcomes of the turning task. For example, tasks requiring faster turning speeds can elicit more severe symptoms due to greater rates of change in visual and vestibular sensory stimulation (29–31), and this provocation of symptoms may affect performance. Other methodological considerations, like the sharpness of the turn angle (27), the height of objects such as cones versus lines on the ground outlining the course (32), or the cognitive complexity and modality of the task (33), can similarly affect turning behavior, such as turning speed and head-body coordination. These factors may affect the clinical value of turning measures for people with mTBI.

The need for objective measurements of turning becomes evident due to the limitations of self-report questionnaires and the often subtle and diverse ways mTBI can manifest (4, 34–38). For instance, one of the most common scales used to assess balance following mTBI is the Balance Error Scoring System (BESS), in which healthcare and sports medicine professionals subjectively count errors and instances of loss of balance while the patient assumes various stance positions with their eyes closed (39). However, even when the BESS results appear normal, more objective measures such as the instrumented BESS (utilizing a single inertial sensor during the testing protocol) may reveal abnormalities (35, 36). Similarly, instrumented sway from the Clinical Test for Sensory Interaction in Balance (mCTSIB) reveal abnormalities where clinical ratings show normal function after mTBI (40). Clinical scales that include turning, such as the Berg Balance Scale (41), often have ceiling effects and may not detect subtle deficits after mTBI especially in highly fit and athletic populations (34). In contrast, instrumented measures of turning, such as peak velocity and segmental coordination across various turn angles, provide reliable measures capable of detecting subtle deficits without relying on subjective visual ratings (42). Both the Veterans Affairs/Department of Defense (VA/DoD) Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management and Rehabilitation of Post-acute Mild Traumatic Brain Injury(43) and Sixth Consensus Statement on Concussion in Sport (44) recommend multimodal screenings that include gait, with the VA/DoD guidelines specifically calling for the evaluation of “walking, tandem walking, walking with head turns, and whole-body turning.” Official evaluation of sport-related concussion should include “timed tandem gait as a single task and a more complex dual-task with the addition of a cognitive task (such as serial 7’s, months backwards or word recall backwards)” (44). The clinical recommendations for including gait, especially turning and DT measures, in mTBI screenings underscores the importance of such measurements, and emphasizes the need for objective tools that are able to detect residual and subtle deficits.

Beyond diagnostic accuracy, the degree to which objective measures of turning reflect a patient’s ability to return-to-duty (RTD), work, or sport remains unclear. This association with real-world function is particularly relevant for rehabilitation decisions that must determine whether subtle residual deficits after mTBI impact one’s readiness for duty, work, or sport. In military populations, where an individual must be able to perform warrior tasks and battle drills such as moving under fire, reacting to contact, and maintaining situational awareness, performance on such duty-relevant tasks is essential to maintain combat effectiveness and ensure survival for themselves and their fellow service members. Common general measures of mobility such as the FGA and HiMAT may not represent the demands imposed by daily life, sports, or specific warrior tasks (urban assault, movement to contact, etc.) that require complex multi-segmental coordination while under cognitive load (45, 46). The clinical utility of turning metrics is jointly determined by the diagnostic accuracy and association with real-world mobility and combat readiness.

Therefore, the first goal of this larger study (37) was to assess diagnostic accuracy—the added value of objective turning measures over standard, general assessments of mobility in identifying concussed individuals who are not fully recovered. We expected that variables from clinic-based turning tasks would have better diagnostic accuracy for identifying individuals with mTBI, as indicated by a greater area under the receiver-operator characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) compared to general measures of mobility. The second goal of this study was to support the validity of the turning variables and assess the associations between general measures of mobility and clinic-based turning tasks with performance in a community ambulatory task (CAT) and a military-relevant simulated urban patrol task (SUP) which we are designating as ecologically-relevant functional tasks. We hypothesized that objective turning variables obtained during the clinic-based turning tasks would be more strongly associated with performance in ecologically-relevant functional tasks compared to performance in general measures of mobility. Finally, we sought to provide recommendations on the best turning tasks and variables for future clinical implementation based on the diagnostic accuracy, added value, and association with the ecologically-relevant functional tasks.

MATERIALS and METHODS

Procedures

Participants completed one testing session that encompassed self-reported questionnaires including demographic information and symptom checklists, neurocognitive testing, and balance and mobility testing including wearable sensors. For the primary purposes of this study, only the mobility procedures are further described in detail.

Clinic-Based Turning Tasks

Participants completed three clinic-based turning tasks in a randomized order (Figure 1): 1) a one-minute walk test (1MW) that involved walking at a comfortable pace between two lines on the ground marked 6 m apart and included 180° turns, 2) a modified Illinois Agility Test (mIAT) that involved running at a maximal safe speed around cones with multiple turns (end, slalom, and mid), and 3) a 140-second walk around a complex turning course (CTC) designed to mimic turns performed in daily life, which involved walking at a comfortable pace around 45°, 90°, and 135° turns. Each of the three turning tasks were completed twice (once under single-task (ST) and another time under DT conditions). The cognitive component for the 1MW and mIAT DT conditions was an 8-digit alpha-numeric grid coordinate memorization task that was introduced within the context of a civilian geocaching activity (15). The cognitive overlay for the CTC DT condition involved monitoring and responding to keywords in a custom-developed simulated radio chatter task designed to mimic demands of military service (14, 15).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Fig 1.

Schematic of the three clinic-based turning tasks with individual turns marked. Turn angles for the complex turning course (CTC) are with respect to straight walking.

General Measures of Mobility

In addition to the clinic-based turning tasks, participants completed two standard clinical assessments to obtain general measures of mobility including the FGA (9) and the HiMAT (10). These two clinical assessments were completed and scored based on standard instructions.

Ecologically-Relevant Functional Tasks

The Community Ambulatory Task (CAT) involved participants walking at their self-selected pace while navigating through a building following landmark-based directions (e.g., “walk down the hallway towards the black doors”). Instructions were provided verbally by a researcher who walked behind the participant to avoid affecting the pace of the participant. The CAT was unique to each site, but all took approximately 6-7 minutes to complete and contained a standardized set of components common to everyday ambulation (i.e., turns, stairs, use of signage).

The Simulated Urban Patrol (SUP) involved navigating a small subdivided room containing LED targets representing hostile (red) and friendly (blue) targets. The room was constructed using PVC pipe and 2.44 m tall black curtains. The LED targets were constructed using an Adafruit Circuit Playground Express circuit board (Adafruit Industries, LLC; New York, NY) programmed to display red or blue LEDs and to respond to an infrared LED signal from a laser-tag weapon (Model T1504, Dynasty Toys). Upon ‘tagging’ the targets with the laser-tag weapon, the targets were programmed to turn off. If a friendly target was tagged, the target was programmed to turn white. Three hostile targets were programmed to require multiple shots to fully clear – the target would illuminate 2/3 of the red LEDs (1/3 cleared) after one shot, 1/3 of the red LEDs (2/3 cleared) after two shots, and no LEDs (fully cleared) after three shots. Ten total targets were displayed in the subdivided room.

Using a laser-tag weapon, participants were instructed to clear all hostile targets as quickly as possible without tagging friendly targets. Participants were given one practice trial where all targets were set to hostile (red). Following the practice trial, three SUP trials were completed and recorded. The location of the targets was fixed throughout the test, but the configuration of each target (hostile vs. friendly) was changed between trials.

RESULTS

Descriptive statistics for each variable and tests for between-group differences are presented in the supplemental material (Supplement B).

Diagnostic Accuracy

A total of 22 of the possible 152 turning variables were retained following the lasso regression (Figure 2). The multivariate lasso model yielded an AUC (95% CI) of 0.92 (0.85, 0.96). Of the 22 retained turning variables, the average lap time during the ST CTC had the single largest AUC (95% CI) of 0.70 (0.58, 0.78). When lasso models were run as individual tests, the model initially including all 1MW outcomes yielded an AUC (95% CI) of 0.71 (0.61, 0.81) with 6 variables retained in the final model, the mIAT yielded an AUC (95% CI) of 0.78 (0.69, 0.86) with 8 retained variables, and the CTC yielded an AUC (95% CI) of 0.90 (0.84, 0.95) with 16 retained variables (Figure 3).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Fig 2.

Areas under the reciever-operator characteristic curve (AUC) for the final lasso model (black) and univariate AUCs for each term included in the lasso model. Univariate AUCs are presented in different symbols for the type of variable (circle = speed, triangle = segmental coordination), different colors for the different tests (blue = complex turning course, yellow = modified Illinois Agility Test, red = one-minute walk test), and different fills for single- or dual-task (filled shape = single-task, empty shape = dual-task). Whiskers indicate the 95% confidence interval for each AUC.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Fig 3.

Areas under the reciever-operator characteristic curve (AUC) for the lasso models for individual tests. Each panel includes the final lasso model (black) and univariate AUCs for each term included in the lasso models. Univariate AUCs are presented in different symbols for the type of variable (circle = speed, triangle = segmental coordination), different colors for the different tests (blue = complex turning course, yellow = modified Illinois Agility Test, red = one-minute walk test), and different fills for single- or dual-task (filled shape = single-task, empty shape = dual-task). Whiskers indicate the 95% confidence interval for each AUC.

Association with Ecologically-Relevant Functional Tasks (CAT and SUP)

Descriptive statistics for the CAT and SUP are presented in the supplemental material (Supplement C). Better performance on the CAT was significantly associated with faster overall lap times of the ST and DT CTC (|r| = 0.53, p < 0.0001 and |r| = 0.47, p < 0.0001, respectively) and faster peak turning speed of the sternum and lumbar spine during the 1MW and CTC tasks (|r| = 0.27-0.42, p < 0.05) (Figure 4 and Table 3). Instrumented measures from ST and DT straight gait were similarly associated with CAT completion time (|r| = 0.30-0.51, p < 0.05), with DT gait speed having the strongest association. Performance on the CAT was not significantly associated with performance on the FGA, HiMAT, or HAM-4 (|r| = 0.19-0.24, p > 0.05).

• Download figure
• Open in new tab

Figure 4.

Partial Pearson correlation correficients for each turning variable obtained from the complex turning course (CTC), modified Illinois Agility Test (mIAT), and one-minute walk test (1MW) with completion time on the community ambulatory task (CAT; left) and simulated urban patrol (SUP; right). Correlation coefficients are shown in different symbols for the type of variable (circle = speed, triangle = segmental coordination), different colors for the different tests (blue = complex turning course, yellow = modified Illinois Agility Test, red = one-minute walk test), and different fills for single- or dual-task (filled shape = single-task, empty shape = dual-task).

View this table:

• View inline
• View popup
• Download powerpoint

Table 3. Partial correlation coefficients between variables from the clinic-based turning tasks, general measures of mobility, and the community ambulation task (CAT).

All variables are ranked by magnitude of correlation coefficient. Variables from clinic-based turning tasks are noted with an * and only variables with significant associations (adjusted p < 0.05) are shown.

Better performance on the SUP was only significantly associated with faster DT mIAT times (|r| = 0.34, p = 0.031). The association between SUP performance and head-body coordination variability and peak trunk turning speed during the CTC approached but failed to reach significance (|r| = 0.29-0.30, p > 0.05; Figure 4 and Table 4). No clinical measure (FGA, HiMAT, HAM-4-mTBI) was significantly associated with SUP performance (|r| = 0.15-0.29, p > 0.05). Amongst clinical measures, the HiMAT score was most strongly associated with SUP performance (|r| = 0.29, p = 0.061).

View this table:

• View inline
• View popup
• Download powerpoint

Table 4. Partial correlation coefficients between variables from the clinic-based turning tasks (*), general measures of mobility, and the simulated urban patrol (SUP) task.

All measures are ranked by magnitude of correlation coefficient. Instrumented turning measures are noted with an * and only instrumented turning measures with significant associations (adjusted p < 0.05) are shown.

DISCUSSION

This study sought to assess the clinical utility, including the diagnostic accuracy and associations with real-world performance, of objective turning measures from clinic-based turning tasks. Our results indicate that individual, objective turning measures from clinic-based turning tasks offer similar diagnostic capacities to standard clinical batteries such as the FGA, HiMAT, and HAM-4-mTBI. The value of instrumented clinic-based turning tasks, however, stems from the ability to capture multi-dimensional variables at once. Regression models using multiple variables from the same test yielded higher AUCs compared to standard clinical assessments (e.g., CTC AUC of 0.90 vs. FGA AUC of 0.68). Further, objective outcomes, including lap time from the ST CTC and segmental coordination from the ST mIAT and DT CTC provided added value by improving the AUC of the FGA, HiMAT, HAM-4-mTBI, and standard assessments of ST or DT gait speed. This superior diagnostic capacity and added value of clinic-based turning tasks, with time commitments (<10 minutes) that are similar or shorter than standard clinical batteries, suggests instrumented, clinic-based turning tasks could improve clinical decisions, including RTD decisions. The military’s Progressive Return to Activity: Primary Care for Acute Concussion Management outlines a physical and cognitive RTD screening “to objectively measure readiness for return to duty.” However, the physical RTD screening only requires two minutes of supervised aerobic activity at an exertion rate of 16 or greater on the Borg Rate of Perceived Exertion scale. Overt symptom provocation is the only metric for determining readiness to progress to the cognitive RTD screening, the final step before returning a service member to full duty. Clinic-based turning tasks, especially when instrumented, could better inform readiness for RTD than a service member’s display of overt symptom provocation or self-report of worsening symptoms with exertion.

Objective turning variables were strongly associated with real-world function on the CAT or SUP, indicating a highly desirable feature for informing RTD decisions. A summary of key stakeholders, including rehabilitation specialists and military command leaders, reported that RTD decisions are primarily based on whether an individual can complete the required duties of their position.(53) Yet, few clinical assessments accurately reflect the demands of daily living, especially specialized military tasks.(53) Out of the standard clinical assessments, only ST and DT gait speed associated with the CAT, while 19 turning measures were associated with CAT performance. Given the nature of the CAT (walking and navigating through a building), it is unsurprising that gait speed was associated with CAT performance. However, lap time from the ST CTC exhibited a slightly stronger association with CAT performance. This result indicates that assessments of ambulatory turning may be more relevant to a person’s daily life than straight-line walking. Similarly, completion time on the DT mIAT was the only variable associated with performance on the SUP; no standard clinical assessments were associated with this military-relevant activity. These results suggest the maximum running and turning speed during the mIAT better reflects high-demand simulated battle drills and may be more important than standard clinical assessments for extrapolating an individual’s performance in combat. Movements during the mIAT may be similar to individual movement techniques service members must perform, like the 3-5 second rush (moving under fire).

Using inertial sensors to capture multiple objective measures of turning enabled individual tasks to achieve high diagnostic capacity, but isolated variables of CTC lap time and mIAT completion time had the strongest clinical utility. Average lap time from the ST CTC had the largest AUC of any clinic-based turning variable and the strongest association with CAT performance. Similarly, DT mIAT completion time had the fourth highest AUC and was the only variable associated with SUP performance. Both these measures reflect an overall performance on the CTC and mIAT task, respectively. While other variables such as peak turning speed and segmental coordination are isolated to specific turns within a task, these measures of lap / completion time include all aspects of the task. Specific features, such as the anticipatory adjustments when initiating or terminating a turn, and the walking or running in between turns, were not quantified by our selected variable set and may be important to understanding an individual’s deficits, particularly during daily life. Notably, these lap time and completion time variables are reliable and do not require instrumentation (42). Both CTC lap time and mIAT completion time could be obtained from a stopwatch for rapid implementation in military and civilian clinics without access to inertial sensors.

A final goal of this study was to provide recommendations for future clinical adoption. Based on the available evidence from this study and prior studies on test-retest reliability, the CTC likely offers the best clinical utility. The CTC yielded the largest AUC values as a combined test, the individual variables with the largest univariate AUCs (ST CTC average lap time), and the individual variables with the strongest association with daily living. Combined, this suggests that the CTC may be a valuable addition to clinical mTBI evaluations, particularly if objective measures from inertial sensors are available to generate the full variable set. However, before CTC variables can be used for clinical decisions, future research should examine changes to the CTC over the course of rehabilitation and whether better performance on the CTC associates with RTD outcomes such as faster RTD in the military population, return to sport in athletic populations, risk for musculoskeletal injuries that are common after mTBI (54–59), and overall performance in one’s military occupational specialty.

While the CTC may offer the best clinical utility out of the tasks examined here, it is unlikely to be a panacea for RTD assessments. Complex and ecologically valid assessment techniques incorporating DT and multitask methods may prove useful in validating return-to-activity requirements in civilian and military populations as they more closely mimic real-world activity and are a step beyond single domain measures of impairment that do not capture the full picture of function (14). There are trade-offs to using more complex functional performance testing for return to activity decisions based on environment (e.g., deployed or garrison environment for military) and timeframe or operational needs for decisions to be made. Recently developed assessments like the Portable Warrior Test of Tactical Agility (POWAR-TOTAL) may be useful for testing military populations with combat roles, given its ability to discriminate service members with mTBI from controls and its responsiveness to rehabilitation (16, 60). However, such tasks may not be relevant for individuals with non-combat roles, including civilian populations. While the POWAR-TOTAL established construct validity using the HiMAT (60), the present CAT results suggest that the HiMAT lacks construct validity for functional tasks for civilians. Rather than reliance on a single assessment, the continued development of multiple complementary, short, and clinically useful assessments that serve as a ‘menu’ based on the patient’s needs may be ideal.

CONCLUSION

Simple turning outcomes can discriminate individuals with persistent mTBI symptoms from healthy controls as well as standard clinical batteries. Instrumented outcomes that quantify intersegmental coordination during these turning tasks provide even more benefit and can increase the diagnostic accuracy of these tests. For the civilian participants in this study, turning outcomes were strongly associated with real-world ambulation and military-relevant battle drills; standard clinical assessments exhibited weaker, or non-significant, associations with these CAT and SUP tasks. Predicting real-world performance requires assessments that match the cognitive and physical demands of the operational environment. Future work should quantify the ambulatory demands of real-world tasks (such as ecological assessments during training tasks performed in the field) and compare them to normative performance on clinically-feasible turning tasks to further establish their validity.

DISCLOSURES / CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

The views expressed in this manuscript are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official policy or position of the U.S. Army Medical Center of Excellence, the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command, Department of the Army, Department of Defense, or any other U.S. Government agency. The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

FUNDING

This work was supported by the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs endorsed by the Department of Defense, through the Congressionally Directed Medical Research Program under Award No. W81XWH1820049 (LK). An integrated SQL database at Oregon Health & Science University has housed all the data and is supported by the Oregon Clinical and Translational Research Institute funded by a grant from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (NCATS), National Institutes of Health, through Grant Award Number UL1TR002369.