Introduction Balance and mobility problems are common consequences after mild traumatic brain injury (mTBI). However, turning and non-straight locomotion, which are required for daily living, are rarely assessed in clinical tests of function after mTBI. Therefore, the primary goals of this study were to assess 1) the added value of clinic-based turning task variables, obtained using wearable sensors, over standard general assessments of mobility, and 2) assess the associations between general assessments of mobility, objective variables from clinic-based turning tasks, and ecologically-relevant functional tasks. Materials and Methods Fifty-three individuals with mTBI and 57 healthy controls participated across three sites. Participants were tested in a single session that encompassed self-reported questionnaires including demographic information and balance and mobility testing including the use of wearable sensors. Lasso regression models and the area under the receiver-operator characteristic curve (AUC) assessed diagnostic accuracy. Partial correlation coefficients assessed the relationship between each variable with ecologically-relevant functional tasks. Results Multivariate models revealed high diagnostic accuracy, with an AUC of 0.92, using multiple clinic-based turning variables. The complex turning course (CTC) yielded the highest multivariate AUC (95% CI) of 0.90 (0.84, 0.95) for single task, and the average lap time from the CTC had the highest univariate AUC (95% CI) of 0.70 (0.58, 0.78). Turning variables provided added value, indicated by higher AUCs, over standard general assessments of mobility. Turning variables had strong associations with ecologically-relevant functional tasks and outperformed general assessments of mobility. Discussion Clinic-based turning tasks, especially the CTC, have high diagnostic accuracy, strong associations with ecologically-relevant functional tasks, and require relatively short time(s) to complete. Compared to general assessments of mobility, clinic-based turning tasks may be more ecologically-relevant to daily function. Future work should continue to examine the CTC alongside other promising tools for return-to-activity assessments.

The authors have declared no competing interest.

NCT03892291

https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03892291

Yes

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

Yes

The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:

The study was approved by the University of Utah (IRB_00114616), Oregona Health & Science University (STUDY00018749), and Allina Health (00002425).

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

Yes

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

Yes

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Yes

Data is available through the Federal Interagency Traumatic Brain Injury Research (FITBIR) Informatics System (doi.org/10.23718/study/390).