The Prognostic Validity of the Timed Up and Go Test With a Dual Task for Predicting the Risk of Falls in the Elderly

Martin Hofheinz, Michael Mibs, Martin Hofheinz, Michael Mibs

Abstract

Objective: The aim is to examine the prognostic validity of the Timed Up and Go Test with a cognitive and a manual dual task for predicting the risk of falls. Method: A follow-up study was performed. The data were recorded for 120 volunteers in an outpatient physiotherapy center, with a 12-month follow-up. The sample included 120 elderly men and women aged 60 to 87 years (M age = 72.2 years) living at home. The main measurements were as follows: The Timed Up and Go Test (TUG), the TUG with a cognitive dual task (TUGcog), and the TUG with a manual dual task (TUGman) and falls. Results: In the 12-month follow-up, 37 persons (30.8%) had a locomotive fall. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve shows significant results for the TUGcog. The area under the curve is 0.65 (p = .008), with a 95% confidence interval (CI) = [0.55, 0.76]. For the TUGman, the area under the curve is 0.57 with a 95% CI = [0.45, 0.68], which is not significant (p = .256). For the TUG, the area under the curve is 0.58, which is not significant (p = .256), 95% CI = [0.47, 0.69]. Conclusion: The TUGcog is a valid prognostic assessment to predict falls in community-dwelling elderly people.

Keywords: assessments; dual task; fall risk; falls; validity.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
ROC curve for the TUG, TUGman, TUGcog. Note. ROC = receiver operating characteristic; TUG = Timed Up and Go Test; TUGman = Timed Up and Go Test with manual dual task; TUGcog = Timed Up and Go Test with cognitive dual task.

References

    1. Barry E., Galvin R., Keogh C., Horgan F., Fahey T. (2014). Is the Timed Up and Go Test a useful predictor of risk of falls in community dwelling older adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Geriatrics, 14, Article 14.
    1. Beauchet O., Fantino B., Allali G., Muir S. W., Montero-Odasso M., Annweiler C. (2011). Timed up and go test and risk of falls in older adults: A systematic review. The Journal of Nutrition Health and Aging, 15, 933-938.
    1. Bloem B. R., Steijns J. A., Smits-Engelsman B. C. (2003). An update on falls. Current Opinion in Neurology, 16, 15-26.
    1. Borel L., Alescio-Lautier B. (2014). Posture and cognition in the elderly: Interaction and contribution to the rehabilitation strategies. Clinical Neurophysiology, 44, 95-107.
    1. Boulgarides L. K., McGinty S. M., Willett J. A., Barnes C. W. (2003). Use of clinical and impairment-based tests to predict falls by community-dwelling older adults. Physical Therapy, 83, 328-339.
    1. Deutsches Netzwerk für Qualitätsentwicklung in der Pflege. (Ed.). (2006). Expertenstandard Sturzprophylaxe in der Pflege [Expert standard for fall prophylaxis in nursing]. Osnabrück, Germany: Fachhochschule Osnabrück.
    1. Gates S., Fisher J. D., Cooke M. W., Carter Y. H., Lamb S. H. (2008). Multifactorial assessment and targeted intervention for preventing falls and injuries among older people in community and emergency care settings: Systematic review and meta-analysis. British Medical Journal, 336, 130-133.
    1. Gothe N. P., Fanning J., Awick E., Chung D., Wójcicki T. R., Olson E. A., . . . McAuley E. (2014). Executive function processes predict mobility outcomes in older adults. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 62, 285-290.
    1. Hall C. D., Echt K. V., Wolf S. L., Rogers W. A. (2011). Cognitive and motor mechanisms underlying older adults’ ability to divide attention while walking. Physical Therapy, 91, 1039-1050.
    1. Hanley J. A., McNeil B. J. (1982). The meaning and use of the area under a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve. Radiology, 143, 29-36.
    1. Hofheinz M., Schusterschitz C. (2010). Dual task interference in estimating the risk of falls and measuring change: A comparative, psychometric study of four measurements. Clinical Rehabilitation, 24, 831-842.
    1. Keegan T. H., Kelsey J. L., King A. C., Quesenbery C. P., Sidney S. (2004). Characteristics of fallers who fracture at the foot, distal forearm, proximal humerus, pelvis, and shaft of the tibia/fibula compared with fallers who do not fracture. American Journal of Epidemiology, 159, 192-193.
    1. Mirelman A., Herman T., Brozgol M., Dorfman M., Sprecher E., Schweiger A., . . . Hausdorff J. M. (2012). Executive function and falls in older adults: New findings from a five-year prospective study link fall risk to cognition. PLoS ONE, 7, e40297.
    1. Montero-Odasso M., Verghese J., Beauchet O., Hausdorff J. M. (2012). Gait and cognition: A complementary approach to understanding brain function and the risk of falling. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 60, 2127-2136.
    1. Nguyen T. V., Center J. R., Sambrook P. N., Eisman J. A. (2001). Risk factors for proximal humerus, forearm, and wrist fractures in elderly men and women: The Dubbo Osteoporosis Epidemiology Study. American Journal of Epidemiology, 153, 587-595.
    1. Nikolaus T. (2005). Gang, Gleichgewicht und Stürze—Funktionsbeurteilung, Diagnostik und Prävention [Gait, balance and falls—Function assessment, diagnosis and prevention]. Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschzeitschrift, 130, 961-964.
    1. Podsiadlo D., Richardson S. (1991). The timed “Up & Go”: A test of basic functional mobility for frail elderly persons. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 39, 142-148.
    1. Quinn P., Horgan F. (2013). Single- and dual-task assessments in elderly patients in a falls intervention programme. International Journal of Therapy and Rehabilitation, 20, 530-535.
    1. Schoene D., Wu S. M., Mikolaizak A. S., Menant J. C., Smith S. T., Delbaere K., Lord S. R. (2013). Discriminative ability and predictive validity of the Timed Up and Go Test in identifying older people who fall: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 61, 202-208.
    1. Scott V., Votova K., Scanlan A., Close J. (2007). Multifactorial and functional mobility assessment tools for fall risk among older adults in community, home-support, long-term and acute care settings. Age and Ageing, 36, 130-139.
    1. Shumway-Cook A., Brauer S., Woollacott M. (2000). Predicting the probability for falls in community-dwelling older adults using the Timed Up & Go Test. Physical Therapy, 80, 896-903.
    1. Shumway-Cook A., Woollacott M. (2000). Attentional demands and postural control: The effect of sensory context. The Journals of Gerontology, Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences, 55, M10-M16.
    1. Toulotte C., Thevenon A., Watelain E., Fabre C. (2006). Identification of healthy elderly fallers and non-fallers by gait analysis under dual-task conditions. Clinical Rehabilitation, 20, 269-276.
    1. Woollacott M., Shumway-Cook A. (2002). Attention and the control of posture and gait: A review of an emerging area of research. Gait & Posture, 16, 1-14.
    1. Yamada M., Aoyama T., Arai H., Nagai K., Tanaka B., Uemura K., . . . Ichihashi N. (2011). Dual-task walk is a reliable predictor of falls in robust elderly adults. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 59, 163-164.
    1. Zeitler H. P., Gulich M., Schmidt U. M. (2004). Stürze verhindern und therapieren [Preventing and treating falls]. Der Hausarzt, 41, 50-53.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

3
Subscribe