30 Second Sit to Stand Test (2024)

Learn more

Register Now

Area of Assessment

Functional Mobility
Strength

Assessment Type

Performance Measure

Administration Mode

Paper & Pencil

Cost

Free

• The 30-Second Chair Test is administered using a folding chair without arms, with seat height of 17 inches (43.2 cm). The chair, with rubber tips on the legs, is placed against a wall to prevent it from moving.
• The participant is seated in the middle of the chair, back straight; feet approximately shoulder width apart and placed on the floor at an angle slightly back from the knees, with one foot slightly in front of the other to help maintain balance. Arms are crossed at the wrists and held against the chest.
• Demonstrate the task both slowly and quickly.
• Have the patient practice a repetition or 2 before completing the test.
• If a patient must use their arms to complete the test they are scored 0.
• The participant is encouraged to complete as many full stands as possible within 30 seconds. The participant is instructed to fully sit between each stand.
• While monitoring the participant’s performance to ensure proper form, the tester silently counts the completion of each correct stand. The score is the total number of stands within 30 seconds (more than halfway up at the end of 30 seconds counts as a full stand). Incorrectly executed stands are not counted.
• The 30-second chair stand involves recording the number of stands a person can complete in 30 seconds rather then the amount of time it takes to complete a pre-determined number of repetitions. That way, it is possible to assess a wide variety of ability levels with scores ranging from 0 for those who can not complete 1 stand to greater than 20 for more fit individuals.

Number of Items

1

• 43.2 cm (17in) folding chair with back
• Stopwatch
• Wall Space

Required Training

Reading an Article/Manual

Body Part

Lower Extremity

ICF Domain

Body Function
Activity

Measurement Domain

Motor

Moderately Active Older Adults:

Normative data published in Rikli and Jones 1999b

(Rikli and Jones, 2013;n= 2140 moderately active older adults)

Criterion fitness standards to maintain physical independence

Community Dwelling Elderly

(Jones et al, 1999)

• Scores ranged from 2-21 correct stands within 30 seconds

Community Dwelling Elderly

(Jones et al, 1999; as an adjunct to the main part of the study, chair stand scores of 190 male and female residents from a nearby retirement housing complex (mean age = 76.2(6.7) years were analyzed to determine the test’s ability to detect age differences over 3 age groups (60’s, 70’s, 80’s) as well as differences in people with high and low levels of fitness (high level of fitness = individuals who participated in moderate physical activity at least 3 days a week, that is activity strenuous enough to cause a noticeable increase in breathing, heart rate and perspiration; low level of fitness = those who either did not participate in moderate exercise or who participated less then 3 times/week)

Community Dwelling Sexagenarian Women

(McCarthy, et al, 2006)

• Mean number of stands: 13.97(3.07)

Hong Kong Community DwellingElderly

(MacFarlane, et al, 2006)

Moderately Active Older Adults:

(Rikli and Jones, 1999;n= 7183 community residing subjects aged 60-94)

Range of scores between 25-75 percentiles

Community Dwelling Elderly

(Jones et al, 1999)

• Excellenttest-retest reliability total number of participants: r = 0.89 (95% Confidence interval 0.79-0.93)
• Excellenttest-retest reliability total number of male participants: r = 0.84
• Excellenttest-retest reliability total number of female participants: r = 0.9
  2

Community Dwelling Elderly

(Jones et al, 1999 a pilot study using a subsample of 15 participants)

• Excellentinterrater reliability: r = 0.95 (95% CI = 0.84-0.97)

Community Dwelling Elderly

(Jones et al, 1999)

• Excellentcriterion validity of the chair stand compared to weight adjusted leg press performance for all participants: r = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.64-0.85
• Excellentcriterion validity of the chair stand compared to weight adjusted leg press performance of men: r = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.63-0.88
• Excellentcriterion validity of the chair stand compared to weight adjusted leg performance of women: r = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.53-0.84

Community Dwelling Sexagenarian Women

(McCarthy, et al, 2006)

• Adequatevalidity when compared to hip extensor isokinetic strength: r = 0.33
• Adequatevalidity when compared to hip flexor isokinetic strength: r = 0.47
• Adequatevalidity when compared to knee extensor isokinetic strength: r = 0.44
• Adequatevalidity when compared to knee flexor isokinetic strength: r = 0.33
• Adequatevalidity when compared to ankle plantar flexor isokinetic strength: r = 0.52
• Poorvalidity when compared to ankle dorsiflexion isokinetic strength: r = 0.21
• Excellentvalidity when compared to 5x sit to stand test: r = 0.83

Hong Kong Chinese Community Dwelling Elderly

(MacFarlane et al, 2006)

• Adequatecriterion validity compared to isometric hip flexion (HF) using Nicholas Manual Muscle Tester: r = 0.42 (95% CI = 0.27-0.54)
• Poorcriterion validity compared to isometric knee extension (KE) using Nicholas Manual Muscle Tester: r = 0.29 (95% CI = 0.14-0.44)
• Adequatecriterion validity compared to HF/kg: r = 0.33 (95% CI = 0.17-0.47)
• Poorcriterion validity compared to KE/kg: r = 0.24 (95% CI = 0.08-0.39)

Community Dwelling Elderly

(Jones et al, 1999)

• 0% floor effects

Community Dwelling Elderly

(Jones et al, 1999)

• Effect sizes for high vs. low activity level means = 0.83; p < 0.0001
• Effect sizes for the 60’s to 70’s age group comparisons = 0.38
• Effect sizes for the 70’s to 80’s age group comparisons = 0.30

Hip OA

(Wright et al, 2011)

• SEM = 1.27

Hip OA

(Wright et al, 2011)

External criterion standard: Participants graded their perceived level of change on the Global Rating of Change Score (GCRS) which is a 15 point scale from -7 to +7. A score of at least +5 is considered major improvement and a score of +4 or less is considered an unimportant change

Hip OA

(Wright et al, 2011)

External criterion standard: Participants graded their perceived level of change on the Global Rating of Change score (GCRS) which is a 15 point scale from -7 to +7. A score of at least +5 is considered major improvement and a score of +4 or less is considered an unimportant change

Individuals with OA awaiting joint replacement of the hip or knee

(Gill et al, 2012)

• Mean number of stands for individuals who do not walk with gait aid= 7.3(2.8) (n = 50)
• Mean number of stands for individuals who walk with a gait aid = 4.5(3.3) (n = 32)

Hip and Knee Osteoarthritis:

(Gill et al, 2008)

• Established test-retest reliability between 2 administrations of the test on the same day by the same rater at 3 time points over 15 weeks in 40 patients awaiting total hip or knee replacement.ICC (1,1) values ranged from 0.97 (95% CI 0.94-0.98) to 0.98 (95% CI 0.97-0.99).

Hip and Knee Osteoarthritis:

(Gill et al, 2008)

• Established inter-rater reliability between 2 administrations of the same test by 2 different raters on the same day.Reliability was assessed at 3 time points over 15 weeks in 42 patients awaiting total hip or knee replacement.ICC (1,1) ranged from 0.93 (95% CI 0.87-0.96) to 0.98 (95% CI 0.96-0.99).

Individuals With OA Awaiting Joint Replacement of the Hip or Knee

(Gill et al, 2012)

• Excellentcorrelation to the 50 ft. walk test: ICC = -0.64(95% CI = -0.75 to -0.49)
• Poorcorrelation to the Patient Specific Function Scale (PSFS): ICC = 0.26 (95% CI 0.04-0.45)
• Adequatecorrelation to the SF-36 Physical Function (SF-36 PF): ICC = 0.39 (95% CI 0.19-0.56)
• Adequatecorrelation to the SF-36 Physical Component Summary (SF-36 PCS): ICC = 0.35 (0.14-0.53)
• Excellentcorrelation to the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC): ICC = -0.62 (95% CI -0.74 to -0.47)
• Adequatecorrelation to the SF-36 Mental Health (SF-36 MH): ICC = 0.33 (95% CI 0.12-0.51)

Individuals with OA awaiting joint replacement of the hip or knee

(Gill et al, 2012)

• Significantly higher scores for individuals who did not ambulate with gait aide compared to individuals who did ambulate with gait aid: p = 0.00, Effect size = 0.64 (95% CI 0.32-0.95)
• Responsiveness:
  • Standardized Response Mean (SRM) = 0.84 (95% CI 0.61-1.07)
  • Guyatt’s Responsiveness Index (GRI) = 0.98 (95% CI 0.73-1.22)

Mixed Populations: (McKay et al., 2017; n = 988; mean (SD) = 21.7 (6.8))

Reference values for the 30-Second Chair Stand Test by age group and sex (number)

^aSignificant sex differences, p < 0.05

^bSignificant sex differences, p < 0.01