Accuracy of the SWAY Mobile Cognitive Assessment Application

Overview

Journal Int J Sports Phys Ther

Specialty Rehabilitation Medicine

Date 2021 Aug 13

PMID 34386278

Citations 5

Authors

Heidi A VanRavenhorst-Bell

Melissa A Muzeau

Lindsay Luinstra

Jared Goering

Ryan Z Amick

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Mobile electronic devices have become integral tools in addressing the need for portable assessment of cognitive function following neurocognitive/motor injury. SWAY Medical, Inc., has employed mobile device motion-based technology in the SWAY Cognitive Assessment (SWAY CA) application to assess cognitive function.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to assess whether the SWAY CA application (reaction time, impulse control and inspective time) was able to reliably operate on different mobile devices and operating systems (iOS, Android). The study further sought to assess the validity of the SWAY CA application against the FDA approved ImPACT QT mobile device application.

Study Design: Original Research, observational study of validity.

Methods: 88 healthy, young adults, 18 to 48 years (= 22.09 ± =4.47 years) completed four, randomized and counter-balanced, reaction time tests (2- SWAY RT, 2- ImPACT QT) using different operating systems (iOS, Android) of 4 randomly assigned mobile devices.

Results: ANOVAs reported the SWAY CA application (reaction time, impulse control, inspection time) operated reliably with iPhone 6S, Samsung Galaxy S9, and iPad Pro 5 mobile devices ( > 0.05), respectively. Google Pixel 3 reliability with SWAY CA application remains undetermined. SWAY CA simple reaction motion measures were in agreement ( = -0.46 to 0.22, ≤ 0.05) with several ImPACT QT reaction time measures. SWAY CA impulse control and inspection time measures are weakly correlated ( = -0.25 to -0.46, ≤ 0.05) with five ImPACT QT reaction time measures.

Conclusion: The motion-based SWAY CA mobile device application appears to reliably operate when being administered on different mobile devices and software operating systems. Furthermore, the SWAY CA application appears to be comparable to the ImPACT QT and serve as a valid tool for assessing reaction time measures.

Level Of Evidence: Level 2b (observational study of validity).

Citing Articles

Immediate Effects of Whole Body Vibration on Proprioception and Upper Extremity Reaction Speed in Young Adult Students.

Maden C, Yigit S, Karabulut D, Kavak F, Yildirim H, Elpeze G Med Lav. 2024; 115(6):e2024045.

PMID: 39697080 PMC: 11734632. DOI: 10.23749/mdl.v115i6.16523.

Effect of ketone monoester supplementation on elite operators' mountaineering training.

Miyatsu T, McAdam J, Coleman K, Chappe E, Tuggle S, McClure T Front Physiol. 2024; 15:1411421.

PMID: 39290617 PMC: 11405315. DOI: 10.3389/fphys.2024.1411421.

Empowering sickle cell disease care: the rise of in Sub-Saharan Africa for enhanced patient's perspectives.

Boma P, Ngoy S, Panda J, Bonnechere B Front Rehabil Sci. 2024; 5:1388855.

PMID: 38994332 PMC: 11236801. DOI: 10.3389/fresc.2024.1388855.

Pupillometry as a new window to player fatigue? A glimpse inside the eyes of a Euro Cup Women's Basketball team.

Huyghe T, Calleja-Gonzalez J, Bird S, Alcaraz P Biol Sport. 2024; 41(1):3-15.

PMID: 38188113 PMC: 10765450. DOI: 10.5114/biolsport.2024.125590.

TEST-RETEST RELIABILITY AND RELIABLE CHANGE INDEX OF MOBILE APPLICATION NEUROCOGNITIVE TEST AMONG MIDDLE AND HIGH SCHOOL ATHLETES.

Hashida K, Lee J, Furutani T, Tsushima W, Tamura K J Athl Train. 2023; 2023(preprint).

PMID: 37459377 PMC: 10895400. DOI: 10.4085/1062-6050-0018.23.

References

Brett B, Zuckerman S, Terry D, Solomon G, Iverson G . Normative Data for the Sway Balance System. Clin J Sport Med. 2018; 30(5):458-464. DOI: 10.1097/JSM.0000000000000632. View

Eckner J, Kutcher J, Richardson J . Effect of concussion on clinically measured reaction time in 9 NCAA division I collegiate athletes: a preliminary study. PM R. 2011; 3(3):212-8. PMC: 3643809. DOI: 10.1016/j.pmrj.2010.12.003. View

Gonzalez-Canete F, Casilari E . Consumption Analysis of Smartphone based Fall Detection Systems with Multiple External Wireless Sensors. Sensors (Basel). 2020; 20(3). PMC: 7038232. DOI: 10.3390/s20030622. View

Eckner J, Kutcher J, Richardson J . Pilot evaluation of a novel clinical test of reaction time in national collegiate athletic association division I football players. J Athl Train. 2010; 45(4):327-32. PMC: 2902024. DOI: 10.4085/1062-6050-45.4.327. View

Patterson J, Amick R, Thummar T, Rogers M . Validation of measures from the smartphone sway balance application: a pilot study. Int J Sports Phys Ther. 2014; 9(2):135-9. PMC: 4004118. View

Ventola C . Mobile devices and apps for health care professionals: uses and benefits. P T. 2014; 39(5):356-64. PMC: 4029126. View

Peart D, Balsalobre-Fernandez C, Shaw M . Use of Mobile Applications to Collect Data in Sport, Health, and Exercise Science: A Narrative Review. J Strength Cond Res. 2017; 33(4):1167-1177. DOI: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000002344. View

Elbin R, DAmico N, McCarthy M, Womble M, OConnor S, Schatz P . How Do ImPACT Quick Test Scores Compare with ImPACT Online Scores in Non-Concussed Adolescent Athletes?. Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2020; 35(3):326-331. DOI: 10.1093/arclin/acz072. View

Collins L, Long C . Visual reaction time and its relationship to neuropsychological test performance. Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 1996; 11(7):613-23. View

10.

Halstead M, Walter K, Moffatt K . Sport-Related Concussion in Children and Adolescents. Pediatrics. 2018; 142(6). DOI: 10.1542/peds.2018-3074. View

11.

Covassin T, Elbin 3rd R, Stiller-Ostrowski J, Kontos A . Immediate post-concussion assessment and cognitive testing (ImPACT) practices of sports medicine professionals. J Athl Train. 2009; 44(6):639-44. PMC: 2775366. DOI: 10.4085/1062-6050-44.6.639. View

12.

Badau D, Baydil B, Badau A . Differences among Three Measures of Reaction Time Based on Hand Laterality in Individual Sports. Sports (Basel). 2018; 6(2). PMC: 6026828. DOI: 10.3390/sports6020045. View

13.

Burghart M, Craig J, Radel J, Huisinga J . Reliability and validity of a motion-based reaction time assessment using a mobile device. Appl Neuropsychol Adult. 2018; 26(6):558-563. PMC: 7309344. DOI: 10.1080/23279095.2018.1469491. View

14.

Del Rossi G . Evaluating the Recovery Curve for Clinically Assessed Reaction Time After Concussion. J Athl Train. 2017; 52(8):766-770. PMC: 5561777. DOI: 10.4085/1062-6050-52.6.02. View

15.

van Kampen D, Lovell M, Pardini J, Collins M, Fu F . The "value added" of neurocognitive testing after sports-related concussion. Am J Sports Med. 2006; 34(10):1630-5. DOI: 10.1177/0363546506288677. View

16.

Del Rosario M, Redmond S, Lovell N . Tracking the Evolution of Smartphone Sensing for Monitoring Human Movement. Sensors (Basel). 2015; 15(8):18901-33. PMC: 4570352. DOI: 10.3390/s150818901. View

17.

Wallace J, Schatz P, Covassin T, Iverson G . Brief iPad-Based Assessment of Cognitive Functioning with ImPACT® Quick Test: Prevalence of Low Scores Using Multivariate Base Rates. Arch Clin Neuropsychol. 2020; 35(8):1276-1282. DOI: 10.1093/arclin/acaa078. View

18.

Resch J, McCrea M, Cullum C . Computerized neurocognitive testing in the management of sport-related concussion: an update. Neuropsychol Rev. 2013; 23(4):335-49. DOI: 10.1007/s11065-013-9242-5. View

19.

Plant R, Quinlan P . Could millisecond timing errors in commonly used equipment be a cause of replication failure in some neuroscience studies?. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2013; 13(3):598-614. DOI: 10.3758/s13415-013-0166-6. View

20.

Woods D, Wyma J, Yund E, Herron T, Reed B . Factors influencing the latency of simple reaction time. Front Hum Neurosci. 2015; 9:131. PMC: 4374455. DOI: 10.3389/fnhum.2015.00131. View