Agreement and Reliability Between Tele-Assessment and In-Person Assessment of the One-Minute Sit-to-Stand Test in Patients with Chronic Respiratory Diseases

Background/Objectives: Telemedicine has emerged as a valuable tool for overcoming access barriers in healthcare, particularly in rehabilitation. However, the validity and reliability of remotely conducted physical capacity assessments remain unclear. This study evaluated the agreement and intra-rater reliability between in-person and tele-assessment administration of the one-minute sit-to-stand test (1 min-STST) in individuals with chronic respiratory diseases (CRDs). Methods: In this cross-sectional study, forty adults (55% female; mean age 59.8 ± 15.9 years) diagnosed with CRDs—including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (52.5%), asthma (20%), and pulmonary fibrosis (20%)—completed the 1 min-STST in two conditions: in person and via tele-assessment. The primary outcome was the number of repetitions completed in each condition. Intra-rater reliability was analyzed using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and agreement between methods was evaluated with Bland–Altman analysis. Results: The mean number of repetitions was 24.4 ± 8.0 in person and 24.3 ± 8.1 via tele-assessment, with no significant difference (p = 0.78). Excellent reliability was observed (ICC = 0.978, p < 0.001), and Bland–Altman analysis showed good agreement with a mean difference of 0.08 ± 1.7 repetitions and limits of agreement from −3.26 to 3.41. No adverse events were reported. Conclusions: Tele-assessment of the 1 min-STST shows excellent agreement and reliability compared to in-person assessment in individuals with CRDs. These findings support tele-assessment as a valid and practical alternative for evaluating functional capacity remotely. Further research is needed to confirm its implementation in home-based or less-controlled settings.