Reference Values for the Timed Up and Go Test : A Descriptive Meta-Analysis

physical mobility testing is an essential component of the geriatric assessment. The timed up and go test measures basic mobility skills including a sequence of functional manoeuvres used in everyday life. to create a practical cut-off value to indicate normal versus below normal timed up and go test performance by comparing test performance of community-dwelling and institutionalised elderly women. 413 community-dwelling and 78 institutionalised mobile elderly women (age range 65-85 years) were enrolled in a cross-sectional study. timed up and go test duration, residential and mobility status, age, height, weight and body mass index were documented. 92% of community-dwelling elderly women performed the timed up and go test in less than 12 seconds and all community-dwelling women had times below 20 seconds. In contrast only 9% of institutionalised elderly women performed the timed up and go test in less than 12 seconds, 42% were below 20 seconds, 32% had results between 20 and 30 seconds and 26% were above 30 seconds. The 10(th)-90(th) percentiles for timed up and go test performance were 6.0-11.2 seconds for community-dwelling and 12.7-50.1 seconds for institutionalised elderly women. When stratifying participants according to mobility status, the timed up and go test duration increased significantly with decreasing mobility (Kruskall-Wallis-test: p<0.0001). Linear regression modelling identified residential status (p<0.0001) and physical mobility status (p<0.0001) as significant predictors of timed up and go performance. This model predicted 54% of total variation of timed up and go test performance. residential and mobility status were identified as the strongest predictors of timed up and go test performance. We recommend the timed up and go test as a screening tool to determine whether an in-depth mobility assessment and early intervention, such as prescription of a walking aid, home visit or physiotherapy, is necessary. Community-dwelling elderly women between 65 and 85 years of age should be able to perform the timed up and go test in 12 seconds or less.

The psychometric properties and clinical use of a battery of physical performance measures were tested on 44 patients with low back pain and 48 healthy, pain-free control subjects. Reliability, validity, and clinical use of nine physical performance measures were evaluated. Although physical performance measures have potential use in evaluation, treatment planning, and determination of treatment outcome, there is sparse systematic investigation of their reliability, validity, and clinical use. Forty-four subjects with low back pain and 48 healthy pain-free subjects participated. The following physical performance measures were tested: distance walked in 5 minutes; 50-foot walk at fastest speed; 50-foot walk at preferred speed; 5 repetitions of a sit-to-stand task; 10 repetitions of a repeated trunk flexion task; timed up-and-go task; unloaded forward reach task; loaded forward reach task; and Sorensen fatigue test. Subjects were assessed twice on 2 days. All measures had excellent intertester reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC]1,1 > 0.95). Test-retest (within session) reliability was adequate for all measures (ICC1,1 > 0.83) except repeated trunk flexion (ICC1,1 > 0.45) in the low back pain group. Test-retest (day-to-day) reliability ranged between 0.59 and 0.88 in the low back pain group and between 0.46 and 0.76 in the control group. Day-to-day reliability improved when the averages of two trials of repeated trunk flexion and sit-to-stand were used (0.76-0.91 low back pain group and 0.62-0.89 control group). Results of a multivariate analysis of variance showed a significant effect of group (F10,65 = 3.52, P = 0.001). Results of univariate analyses showed significant group differences on all measures except the 50-foot walk at preferred speed and unloaded forward reach. Self-report of disability was moderately correlated with the performance tasks (r = 0.400 to -0.603). The results provide support for the use of these physical performance measures as a complement to patient self-report.

To determine normal values for four commonly used clinical functional balance tests from community-dwelling women aged 20 to 80 and to identify any significant decline due to aging. A cross-sectional study was undertaken to provide normative values for four clinical balance tests across 6 decade cohorts. The Betty Byrne-Henderson Center for Women and Aging, Royal Womens' Hospital, Brisbane, Australia. Four hundred fifty-six community-dwelling, independently ambulant women with no obvious neurological or musculoskeletal-related disability, aged 20 to 80, were randomly recruited from a large metropolitan region. The clinical balance measures/tests were the Timed Up and Go test, step test, Functional Reach test, and lateral reach test. Multivariate analysis was used to test the effect for age, height, and activity level. Normal data were produced for each test across each decade cohort. Gradual decline in balance performance was confirmed, with significant effect for age demonstrated. New normative data across the adult age decades are available for these clinical tests. Use of clinical balance tests could complement other balance tests and be used to screen women aged 40 to 60 whose performance is outside the normal values for age and to decrease later falls risk.