Use of Backward Walking Speed to Screen Dynamic Balance and Mobility Deficits in Older Adults Living Independently in the Community.

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q4 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY Journal of Geriatric Physical Therapy Pub Date : 2021-10-01 DOI:10.1519/JPT.0000000000000290
Logan Taulbee, Trishia Yada, Lauren Graham, Allison O'Halloran, Dawn Saracino, Jane Freund, Srikant Vallabhajosula, Chitralakshmi K Balasubramanian
{"title":"Use of Backward Walking Speed to Screen Dynamic Balance and Mobility Deficits in Older Adults Living Independently in the Community.","authors":"Logan Taulbee,&nbsp;Trishia Yada,&nbsp;Lauren Graham,&nbsp;Allison O'Halloran,&nbsp;Dawn Saracino,&nbsp;Jane Freund,&nbsp;Srikant Vallabhajosula,&nbsp;Chitralakshmi K Balasubramanian","doi":"10.1519/JPT.0000000000000290","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and purpose: </strong>Older adults who live independently in the community are higher functioning and routinely ambulate in the community. Unrestricted community ambulation increases the likelihood of encountering precarious situations challenging balance. Sufficient dynamic balance is necessary to avoid falls. Currently used balance and mobility assessments may not sufficiently challenge dynamic balance to uncover mobility deficits in independent community-dwelling older adults. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether backward walking speed (BWS) can serve as an outcome measure to screen dynamic balance and mobility deficits in independent community-dwelling older adults.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A convenience sample of 30 older adults (73.68 ± 6.54 years) participated in this cross-sectional study. Participants walked backward on an instrumented walkway to record BWS. Other outcomes included forward walking speed (FWS), Community Balance and Mobility (CB&M) Scale, Falls Efficacy Scale-International (FES-I), Timed Up and Go (TUG) test, and 7-day average step count (ASC). A multivariate analysis of variance investigated the overall group differences between older adults at fall risk and those not at risk and was followed up by univariate tests. Pearson and spearman coefficients investigated associations between study outcomes. Youden's index assessed diagnostic accuracy.</p><p><strong>Results and discussion: </strong>Backward walking speed, CB&M, FES-I, ASC discriminated older adults at fall risk from those not at risk (P < .01) whereas FWS and TUG did not. Backward walking speed strongly correlated with challenging assessments of balance and mobility (CB&M, FES-I, and ASC) but only moderately correlated with the TUG. The CB&M Scale independently explained 53% variance in the BWS performance (P < .01). Youden's index was highest (Y = 0.6, sensitivity = 93%, and specificity = 67%) for BWS (0.73 m/s) compared with other study outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Preliminary results suggest that BWS can screen for dynamic balance and mobility deficits in independent community-dwelling older adults. Accurate screening is the first step to capture early decline in function for independent community-dwelling older adults. Longitudinal follow-up studies are warranted to validate BWS as a screening tool.</p>","PeriodicalId":49035,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Geriatric Physical Therapy","volume":"44 4","pages":"189-197"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Geriatric Physical Therapy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1519/JPT.0000000000000290","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Background and purpose: Older adults who live independently in the community are higher functioning and routinely ambulate in the community. Unrestricted community ambulation increases the likelihood of encountering precarious situations challenging balance. Sufficient dynamic balance is necessary to avoid falls. Currently used balance and mobility assessments may not sufficiently challenge dynamic balance to uncover mobility deficits in independent community-dwelling older adults. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether backward walking speed (BWS) can serve as an outcome measure to screen dynamic balance and mobility deficits in independent community-dwelling older adults.

Methods: A convenience sample of 30 older adults (73.68 ± 6.54 years) participated in this cross-sectional study. Participants walked backward on an instrumented walkway to record BWS. Other outcomes included forward walking speed (FWS), Community Balance and Mobility (CB&M) Scale, Falls Efficacy Scale-International (FES-I), Timed Up and Go (TUG) test, and 7-day average step count (ASC). A multivariate analysis of variance investigated the overall group differences between older adults at fall risk and those not at risk and was followed up by univariate tests. Pearson and spearman coefficients investigated associations between study outcomes. Youden's index assessed diagnostic accuracy.

Results and discussion: Backward walking speed, CB&M, FES-I, ASC discriminated older adults at fall risk from those not at risk (P < .01) whereas FWS and TUG did not. Backward walking speed strongly correlated with challenging assessments of balance and mobility (CB&M, FES-I, and ASC) but only moderately correlated with the TUG. The CB&M Scale independently explained 53% variance in the BWS performance (P < .01). Youden's index was highest (Y = 0.6, sensitivity = 93%, and specificity = 67%) for BWS (0.73 m/s) compared with other study outcomes.

Conclusions: Preliminary results suggest that BWS can screen for dynamic balance and mobility deficits in independent community-dwelling older adults. Accurate screening is the first step to capture early decline in function for independent community-dwelling older adults. Longitudinal follow-up studies are warranted to validate BWS as a screening tool.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
使用后退行走速度来筛查社区独立生活的老年人的动态平衡和行动能力缺陷。
背景和目的:在社区中独立生活的老年人功能较高,经常在社区中走动。不受限制的社区活动增加了遇到挑战平衡的不稳定情况的可能性。充分的动态平衡是避免跌倒的必要条件。目前使用的平衡和活动能力评估可能不足以挑战动态平衡,以发现独立社区居住的老年人的活动能力缺陷。本研究的目的是探讨后退步行速度(BWS)是否可以作为筛查独立社区居住老年人动态平衡和活动能力缺陷的结果测量指标。方法:方便抽样30例老年人(73.68±6.54岁)参加本横断面研究。参与者在有仪器的人行道上向后走,以记录BWS。其他结果包括向前行走速度(FWS)、社区平衡和流动性(CB&M)量表、跌倒功效量表-国际(FES-I)、计时起身(TUG)测试和7天平均步数(ASC)。多变量方差分析调查了有跌倒风险的老年人和没有跌倒风险的老年人之间的总体组差异,并通过单变量测试进行了随访。皮尔逊系数和斯皮尔曼系数调查了研究结果之间的关联。约登指数评估诊断的准确性。结果和讨论:后退步行速度、CB&M、FES-I、ASC对有跌倒风险的老年人和无跌倒风险的老年人有区别(P < 0.01),而FWS和TUG没有区别。后退步行速度与平衡和机动性挑战性评估(CB&M、FES-I和ASC)密切相关,但与TUG仅中度相关。CB&M量表独立解释了53%的BWS绩效方差(P < 0.01)。与其他研究结果相比,BWS (0.73 m/s)的约登指数最高(Y = 0.6,敏感性= 93%,特异性= 67%)。结论:初步结果表明BWS可以筛查独立社区居住老年人的动态平衡和活动能力缺陷。准确的筛查是捕捉独立社区居住老年人功能早期下降的第一步。有必要进行纵向随访研究来验证BWS作为筛查工具的有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Geriatric Physical Therapy
Journal of Geriatric Physical Therapy GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY-REHABILITATION
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
4.20%
发文量
58
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: ​Journal of Geriatric Physical Therapy is the leading source of clinically applicable evidence for achieving optimal health, wellness, mobility, and physical function across the continuum of health status for the aging adult. The mission of the Academy of Geriatric Physical Therapy is building a community that advances the profession of physical therapy to optimize the experience of aging.
期刊最新文献
A Scoping Review of the Predictive Qualities of Walking Speed in Older Adults. Associations of Usual and Fast Gait Speed With Physical Performance and Balance Confidence in Community-Dwelling Older Adults: Implications for Assessment. Simple Mobility Tests Predict Use of Assistive Devices in Older Adults. Step Test Evaluation of Performance on Stairs (STEPS): Assessing Stair Function in Older Adults. The Power of Language: Words to Mend or Fuel Ageism Within Geriatrics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1