Peer-Reviewed Journal Details
Mandatory Fields
Vance, R. C.,Healy, D. G.,Galvin, R.,French, H. P.
2015
January
Physical Therapy
Dual tasking with the timed "up & go" test improves detection of risk of falls in people with Parkinson disease
Published
()
Optional Fields
Accidental Falls/ prevention & control Aged Aged, 80 and over Cognition/physiology Cohort Studies Exercise Test Female Humans Likelihood Functions Male Neuropsychological Tests Parkinson Disease/ physiopathology ROC Curve Retrospective Studies Risk Assessment Sensitivity and Specificity
95
11
95
102
BACKGROUND: Falls are a common and disabling feature of Parkinson disease (PD). Early identification of patients at greatest risk of falling is a key goal of physical therapy assessment. The Timed "Up & Go" Test (TUG), a frequently used mobility assessment tool, has moderate sensitivity and specificity for identifying fall risk. OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to investigate whether adding a task (cognitive or manual) to the TUG (TUG-cognitive or TUG-manual, respectively) increases the utility of the test for identifying fall risk in people with PD. DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study of people with PD (N=36). METHODS: Participants were compared on the basis of self-reported fall exposure in the preceding 6 months (those who had experienced falls ["fallers"] versus those who had not ["nonfallers"]). The time taken to complete the TUG, TUG-cognitive, and TUG-manual was measured for both groups. Between-group differences were calculated with the Mann-Whitney U test. The discriminative performance of the test at various cutoff values was examined, and estimates of sensitivity and specificity were based on receiver operating characteristic curve plots. RESULTS: Fallers took significantly longer than nonfallers (n=19) to complete the TUG under all 3 conditions. The TUG-cognitive showed optimal discriminative performance (receiver operating characteristic area under the curve=0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.64, 0.92) at a cutoff of 14.7 seconds. The TUG-cognitive was more likely to correctly classify participants with a low risk of falling (positive likelihood ratio=2.9) (<14.7 seconds) and had higher estimates of sensitivity (0.76; 95% CI=0.52, 0.90) than of specificity (0.73; 95% CI=0.51, 0.88) at this threshold (negative likelihood ratio=0.32). LIMITATIONS: Retrospective classification of fallers and nonfallers was used. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of a cognitive task to the TUG enhanced the identification of fall risk in people with PD. The TUG-cognitive should be considered a component of a multifaceted fall risk assessment in people with PD.BACKGROUND: Falls are a common and disabling feature of Parkinson disease (PD). Early identification of patients at greatest risk of falling is a key goal of physical therapy assessment. The Timed "Up & Go" Test (TUG), a frequently used mobility assessment tool, has moderate sensitivity and specificity for identifying fall risk. OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to investigate whether adding a task (cognitive or manual) to the TUG (TUG-cognitive or TUG-manual, respectively) increases the utility of the test for identifying fall risk in people with PD. DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study of people with PD (N=36). METHODS: Participants were compared on the basis of self-reported fall exposure in the preceding 6 months (those who had experienced falls ["fallers"] versus those who had not ["nonfallers"]). The time taken to complete the TUG, TUG-cognitive, and TUG-manual was measured for both groups. Between-group differences were calculated with the Mann-Whitney U test. The discriminative performance of the test at various cutoff values was examined, and estimates of sensitivity and specificity were based on receiver operating characteristic curve plots. RESULTS: Fallers took significantly longer than nonfallers (n=19) to complete the TUG under all 3 conditions. The TUG-cognitive showed optimal discriminative performance (receiver operating characteristic area under the curve=0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI]=0.64, 0.92) at a cutoff of 14.7 seconds. The TUG-cognitive was more likely to correctly classify participants with a low risk of falling (positive likelihood ratio=2.9) (<14.7 seconds) and had higher estimates of sensitivity (0.76; 95% CI=0.52, 0.90) than of specificity (0.73; 95% CI=0.51, 0.88) at this threshold (negative likelihood ratio=0.32). LIMITATIONS: Retrospective classification of fallers and nonfallers was used. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of a cognitive task to the TUG enhanced the identification of fall risk in people with PD. The TUG-cognitive should be considered a component of a multifaceted fall risk assessment in people with PD.
1538-6724 (Electronic)00
2014/08/26
http://ptjournal.apta.org/content/ptjournal/95/1/95.full.pdfhttp://ptjournal.apta.org/content/ptjournal/95/1/95.full.pdf
10.2522/ptj.20130386
Grant Details