Multiple modes of assessment of gait are better than one to predict incident falls

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Though gait evaluation is recommended as a core component of fall risk assessments, a systematic examination of the predictive validity of different modes of gait assessments for falls is lacking. Objective: To compare three commonly employed gait assessments - self-reported walking difficulties, clinical evaluation, and quantitative gait - to predict incident falls. Materials and methods: 380 community-dwelling older adults (mean age 76.5. ±. 6.8. y, 55.8% female) were evaluated with three independent gait assessment modes: patient-centered, quantitative, and clinician-diagnosed. The association of these three gait assessment modes with incident falls was examined using Cox proportional hazards models. Results: 23.2% of participants self-reported walking difficulties, 15.5% had slow gait, and 48.4% clinical gait abnormalities. 30.3% had abnormalities on only one assessment, whereas only 6.3% had abnormalities on all three. Over a mean follow-up of 24.2 months, 137 participants (36.1%) fell. Those with at least two abnormal gait assessments presented an increased risk of incident falls (hazard ratio (HR): 1.61, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.04-2.49) in comparison to the 169 participants without any abnormalities on any of the three assessments. Conclusions: Multiple modes of gait evaluation provide a more comprehensive mobility assessment than only one assessment alone, and better identify incident falls in older adults.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)389-393
Number of pages5
JournalArchives of Gerontology and Geriatrics
Volume60
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 2015

Fingerprint

Gait
incident
Mobility Limitation
evaluation
Independent Living
risk assessment
Proportional Hazards Models
confidence
Confidence Intervals
examination
community

Keywords

  • Aging
  • Clinical assessment
  • Falls
  • Gait disorders

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Aging
  • Geriatrics and Gerontology
  • Health(social science)
  • Gerontology

Cite this

Multiple modes of assessment of gait are better than one to predict incident falls. / Allali, Gilles; Ayers, Emmeline I.; Verghese, Joe.

In: Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics, Vol. 60, No. 3, 01.05.2015, p. 389-393.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{35c644c090a549888ee5b2ebcba49c2c,
title = "Multiple modes of assessment of gait are better than one to predict incident falls",
abstract = "Background: Though gait evaluation is recommended as a core component of fall risk assessments, a systematic examination of the predictive validity of different modes of gait assessments for falls is lacking. Objective: To compare three commonly employed gait assessments - self-reported walking difficulties, clinical evaluation, and quantitative gait - to predict incident falls. Materials and methods: 380 community-dwelling older adults (mean age 76.5. ±. 6.8. y, 55.8{\%} female) were evaluated with three independent gait assessment modes: patient-centered, quantitative, and clinician-diagnosed. The association of these three gait assessment modes with incident falls was examined using Cox proportional hazards models. Results: 23.2{\%} of participants self-reported walking difficulties, 15.5{\%} had slow gait, and 48.4{\%} clinical gait abnormalities. 30.3{\%} had abnormalities on only one assessment, whereas only 6.3{\%} had abnormalities on all three. Over a mean follow-up of 24.2 months, 137 participants (36.1{\%}) fell. Those with at least two abnormal gait assessments presented an increased risk of incident falls (hazard ratio (HR): 1.61, 95{\%} confidence interval (CI): 1.04-2.49) in comparison to the 169 participants without any abnormalities on any of the three assessments. Conclusions: Multiple modes of gait evaluation provide a more comprehensive mobility assessment than only one assessment alone, and better identify incident falls in older adults.",
keywords = "Aging, Clinical assessment, Falls, Gait disorders",
author = "Gilles Allali and Ayers, {Emmeline I.} and Joe Verghese",
year = "2015",
month = "5",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.archger.2015.02.009",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "60",
pages = "389--393",
journal = "Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics",
issn = "0167-4943",
publisher = "Elsevier Ireland Ltd",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Multiple modes of assessment of gait are better than one to predict incident falls

AU - Allali, Gilles

AU - Ayers, Emmeline I.

AU - Verghese, Joe

PY - 2015/5/1

Y1 - 2015/5/1

N2 - Background: Though gait evaluation is recommended as a core component of fall risk assessments, a systematic examination of the predictive validity of different modes of gait assessments for falls is lacking. Objective: To compare three commonly employed gait assessments - self-reported walking difficulties, clinical evaluation, and quantitative gait - to predict incident falls. Materials and methods: 380 community-dwelling older adults (mean age 76.5. ±. 6.8. y, 55.8% female) were evaluated with three independent gait assessment modes: patient-centered, quantitative, and clinician-diagnosed. The association of these three gait assessment modes with incident falls was examined using Cox proportional hazards models. Results: 23.2% of participants self-reported walking difficulties, 15.5% had slow gait, and 48.4% clinical gait abnormalities. 30.3% had abnormalities on only one assessment, whereas only 6.3% had abnormalities on all three. Over a mean follow-up of 24.2 months, 137 participants (36.1%) fell. Those with at least two abnormal gait assessments presented an increased risk of incident falls (hazard ratio (HR): 1.61, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.04-2.49) in comparison to the 169 participants without any abnormalities on any of the three assessments. Conclusions: Multiple modes of gait evaluation provide a more comprehensive mobility assessment than only one assessment alone, and better identify incident falls in older adults.

AB - Background: Though gait evaluation is recommended as a core component of fall risk assessments, a systematic examination of the predictive validity of different modes of gait assessments for falls is lacking. Objective: To compare three commonly employed gait assessments - self-reported walking difficulties, clinical evaluation, and quantitative gait - to predict incident falls. Materials and methods: 380 community-dwelling older adults (mean age 76.5. ±. 6.8. y, 55.8% female) were evaluated with three independent gait assessment modes: patient-centered, quantitative, and clinician-diagnosed. The association of these three gait assessment modes with incident falls was examined using Cox proportional hazards models. Results: 23.2% of participants self-reported walking difficulties, 15.5% had slow gait, and 48.4% clinical gait abnormalities. 30.3% had abnormalities on only one assessment, whereas only 6.3% had abnormalities on all three. Over a mean follow-up of 24.2 months, 137 participants (36.1%) fell. Those with at least two abnormal gait assessments presented an increased risk of incident falls (hazard ratio (HR): 1.61, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.04-2.49) in comparison to the 169 participants without any abnormalities on any of the three assessments. Conclusions: Multiple modes of gait evaluation provide a more comprehensive mobility assessment than only one assessment alone, and better identify incident falls in older adults.

KW - Aging

KW - Clinical assessment

KW - Falls

KW - Gait disorders

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84926528673&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84926528673&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.archger.2015.02.009

DO - 10.1016/j.archger.2015.02.009

M3 - Article

VL - 60

SP - 389

EP - 393

JO - Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics

JF - Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics

SN - 0167-4943

IS - 3

ER -