259
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    7
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      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

      research-article
      1 , 1 , , 1 , 1 , 1
      BMC Geriatrics
      BioMed Central

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          The Timed Up and Go test (TUG) is a commonly used screening tool to assist clinicians to identify patients at risk of falling. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to determine the overall predictive value of the TUG in community-dwelling older adults.

          Methods

          A literature search was performed to identify all studies that validated the TUG test. The methodological quality of the selected studies was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool, a validated tool for the quality assessment of diagnostic accuracy studies. A TUG score of ≥13.5 seconds was used to identify individuals at higher risk of falling. All included studies were combined using a bivariate random effects model to generate pooled estimates of sensitivity and specificity at ≥13.5 seconds. Heterogeneity was assessed using the variance of logit transformed sensitivity and specificity.

          Results

          Twenty-five studies were included in the systematic review and 10 studies were included in meta-analysis. The TUG test was found to be more useful at ruling in rather than ruling out falls in individuals classified as high risk (>13.5 sec), with a higher pooled specificity (0.74, 95% CI 0.52-0.88) than sensitivity (0.31, 95% CI 0.13-0.57). Logistic regression analysis indicated that the TUG score is not a significant predictor of falls (OR = 1.01, 95% CI 1.00-1.02, p = 0.05).

          Conclusion

          The Timed Up and Go test has limited ability to predict falls in community dwelling elderly and should not be used in isolation to identify individuals at high risk of falls in this setting.

          Related collections

          Most cited references44

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Risk factors for falls among elderly persons living in the community.

          To study risk factors for falling, we conducted a one-year prospective investigation, using a sample of 336 persons at least 75 years of age who were living in the community. All subjects underwent detailed clinical evaluation, including standardized measures of mental status, strength, reflexes, balance, and gait; in addition, we inspected their homes for environmental hazards. Falls and their circumstances were identified during bimonthly telephone calls. During one year of follow-up, 108 subjects (32 percent) fell at least once; 24 percent of those who fell had serious injuries and 6 percent had fractures. Predisposing factors for falls were identified in linear-logistic models. The adjusted odds ratio for sedative use was 28.3; for cognitive impairment, 5.0; for disability of the lower extremities, 3.8; for palmomental reflex, 3.0; for abnormalities of balance and gait, 1.9; and for foot problems, 1.8; the lower bounds of the 95 percent confidence intervals were 1 or more for all variables. The risk of falling increased linearly with the number of risk factors, from 8 percent with none to 78 percent with four or more risk factors (P less than 0.0001). About 10 percent of the falls occurred during acute illness, 5 percent during hazardous activity, and 44 percent in the presence of environmental hazards. We conclude that falls among older persons living in the community are common and that a simple clinical assessment can identify the elderly persons who are at the greatest risk of falling.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Measuring the accuracy of diagnostic systems.

            J Swets (1988)
            Diagnostic systems of several kinds are used to distinguish between two classes of events, essentially "signals" and "noise". For them, analysis in terms of the "relative operating characteristic" of signal detection theory provides a precise and valid measure of diagnostic accuracy. It is the only measure available that is uninfluenced by decision biases and prior probabilities, and it places the performances of diverse systems on a common, easily interpreted scale. Representative values of this measure are reported here for systems in medical imaging, materials testing, weather forecasting, information retrieval, polygraph lie detection, and aptitude testing. Though the measure itself is sound, the values obtained from tests of diagnostic systems often require qualification because the test data on which they are based are of unsure quality. A common set of problems in testing is faced in all fields. How well these problems are handled, or can be handled in a given field, determines the degree of confidence that can be placed in a measured value of accuracy. Some fields fare much better than others.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Predicting the probability for falls in community-dwelling older adults using the Timed Up & Go Test.

              This study examined the sensitivity and specificity of the Timed Up & Go Test (TUG) under single-task versus dual-task conditions for identifying elderly individuals who are prone to falling. Fifteen older adults with no history of falls (mean age=78 years, SD=6, range=65-85) and 15 older adults with a history of 2 or more falls in the previous 6 months (mean age=86.2 years, SD=6, range=76-95) participated. Time taken to complete the TUG under 3 conditions (TUG, TUG with a subtraction task [TUGcognitive], and TUG while carrying a full cup of water [TUGmanual]) was measured. A multivariate analysis of variance and discriminant function and logistic regression analyses were performed. The TUG was found to be a sensitive (sensitivity=87%) and specific (specificity=87%) measure for identifying elderly individuals who are prone to falls. For both groups of older adults, simultaneous performance of an additional task increased the time taken to complete the TUG, with the greatest effect in the older adults with a history of falls. The TUG scores with or without an additional task (cognitive or manual) were equivalent with respect to identifying fallers and nonfallers. The results suggest that the TUG is a sensitive and specific measure for identifying community-dwelling adults who are at risk for falls. The ability to predict falls is not enhanced by adding a secondary task when performing the TUG.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMC Geriatr
                BMC Geriatr
                BMC Geriatrics
                BioMed Central
                1471-2318
                2014
                1 February 2014
                : 14
                : 14
                Affiliations
                [1 ]HRB Centre for Primary Care research, Department of General Practice, Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland, 123 St. Stephens Green, Dublin 2, Republic of Ireland
                Article
                1471-2318-14-14
                10.1186/1471-2318-14-14
                3924230
                24484314
                b54c6fd2-152c-45b2-ba4e-160a03009376
                Copyright © 2014 Barry et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited.

                History
                : 27 August 2013
                : 27 January 2014
                Categories
                Research Article

                Geriatric medicine
                Geriatric medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article