Multiple modes of assessment of gait are better than one to predict incident falls.
Details
Serval ID
serval:BIB_99914C9A2E67
Type
Article: article from journal or magazin.
Collection
Publications
Institution
Title
Multiple modes of assessment of gait are better than one to predict incident falls.
Journal
Archives of gerontology and geriatrics
ISSN
1872-6976 (Electronic)
ISSN-L
0167-4943
Publication state
Published
Issued date
2015
Peer-reviewed
Oui
Volume
60
Number
3
Pages
389-393
Language
english
Notes
Publication types: Comparative Study ; Journal Article ; Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural ; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Publication Status: ppublish
Publication Status: ppublish
Abstract
Though gait evaluation is recommended as a core component of fall risk assessments, a systematic examination of the predictive validity of different modes of gait assessments for falls is lacking.
To compare three commonly employed gait assessments - self-reported walking difficulties, clinical evaluation, and quantitative gait - to predict incident falls.
380 community-dwelling older adults (mean age 76.5 ± 6.8 y, 55.8% female) were evaluated with three independent gait assessment modes: patient-centered, quantitative, and clinician-diagnosed. The association of these three gait assessment modes with incident falls was examined using Cox proportional hazards models.
23.2% of participants self-reported walking difficulties, 15.5% had slow gait, and 48.4% clinical gait abnormalities. 30.3% had abnormalities on only one assessment, whereas only 6.3% had abnormalities on all three. Over a mean follow-up of 24.2 months, 137 participants (36.1%) fell. Those with at least two abnormal gait assessments presented an increased risk of incident falls (hazard ratio (HR): 1.61, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.04-2.49) in comparison to the 169 participants without any abnormalities on any of the three assessments.
Multiple modes of gait evaluation provide a more comprehensive mobility assessment than only one assessment alone, and better identify incident falls in older adults.
To compare three commonly employed gait assessments - self-reported walking difficulties, clinical evaluation, and quantitative gait - to predict incident falls.
380 community-dwelling older adults (mean age 76.5 ± 6.8 y, 55.8% female) were evaluated with three independent gait assessment modes: patient-centered, quantitative, and clinician-diagnosed. The association of these three gait assessment modes with incident falls was examined using Cox proportional hazards models.
23.2% of participants self-reported walking difficulties, 15.5% had slow gait, and 48.4% clinical gait abnormalities. 30.3% had abnormalities on only one assessment, whereas only 6.3% had abnormalities on all three. Over a mean follow-up of 24.2 months, 137 participants (36.1%) fell. Those with at least two abnormal gait assessments presented an increased risk of incident falls (hazard ratio (HR): 1.61, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.04-2.49) in comparison to the 169 participants without any abnormalities on any of the three assessments.
Multiple modes of gait evaluation provide a more comprehensive mobility assessment than only one assessment alone, and better identify incident falls in older adults.
Keywords
Accidental Falls/prevention & control, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Aging, Female, Gait, Geriatric Assessment/methods, Humans, Incidence, Male, Mobility Limitation, Postural Balance, Prospective Studies, Residence Characteristics, Risk Assessment, Risk Factors, Clinical assessment, Falls, Gait disorders
Pubmed
Web of science
Create date
06/10/2023 8:12
Last modification date
07/10/2023 5:58