Validity and Reliability of the Self-Administered Timed Up and Go Test in Assessing Fall Risk in Community-Dwelling Older Adults.

IF 2.1 Q3 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY
Magda Reis, Maria Teixeira, Carlota Carvão, Anabela Correia Martins
{"title":"Validity and Reliability of the Self-Administered Timed Up and Go Test in Assessing Fall Risk in Community-Dwelling Older Adults.","authors":"Magda Reis, Maria Teixeira, Carlota Carvão, Anabela Correia Martins","doi":"10.3390/geriatrics10030062","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objectives:</b> This study aimed to evaluate the validity and reliability of the self-administered Timed Up and Go (TUG) test-a gold standard for fall risk screening-by comparing it to the traditional face-to-face assessment conducted by a physiotherapist. <b>Methods:</b> A total of 37 community-dwelling adults-mean age 61.78 ± 6.88, 73% female-who took part in fall risk screening actions in the central region of Portugal were assessed. The protocol included sociodemographic and history of falls questions, the Self-Efficacy for Exercise questionnaire, the Activities and Participation Profile Related to Mobility (PAPM), and three functional tests, namely the 10-Metre Walking Speed (10-MWS), TUG, and 30 Seconds Sit to Stand (30 s STS) tests. Within an interval of 18-24 h after the face-to-face moment, the participants were instructed to self-administer the TUG test at home. The validity and reliability of self-administered TUG test were examined using the limits of agreement, clinically acceptable limit, intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs), paired <i>t</i>-tests, and Pearson's coefficient correlation (r). <b>Results:</b> The limits of agreement for self-administered assessment were within the clinically acceptable limits. The average result of the face-to-face TUG test and the self-administered TUG test was 7.47 ± 2.45 and 7.57 ± 3.10 s, respectively. When comparing the two evaluations, they were strongly associated (r = 0.716, <i>p</i> < 0.001), with an excellent ICC of 0.82 (0.65-0.91), for a 95% confidence interval and significance level of 0.05 (<i>p</i> ≤ 0.05). <b>Conclusions:</b> The use of the self-administered TUG test for the screening of risk of fall, using low-cost technology, appears to be valid and reliable in community-dwelling adults aged 50 and above. Enabling older adults to perform the TUG test at home can empower them to take an active role in managing their health and ageing process, while also offering physiotherapists regular feedback for fall prevention.</p>","PeriodicalId":12653,"journal":{"name":"Geriatrics","volume":"10 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12101206/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Geriatrics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/geriatrics10030062","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the validity and reliability of the self-administered Timed Up and Go (TUG) test-a gold standard for fall risk screening-by comparing it to the traditional face-to-face assessment conducted by a physiotherapist. Methods: A total of 37 community-dwelling adults-mean age 61.78 ± 6.88, 73% female-who took part in fall risk screening actions in the central region of Portugal were assessed. The protocol included sociodemographic and history of falls questions, the Self-Efficacy for Exercise questionnaire, the Activities and Participation Profile Related to Mobility (PAPM), and three functional tests, namely the 10-Metre Walking Speed (10-MWS), TUG, and 30 Seconds Sit to Stand (30 s STS) tests. Within an interval of 18-24 h after the face-to-face moment, the participants were instructed to self-administer the TUG test at home. The validity and reliability of self-administered TUG test were examined using the limits of agreement, clinically acceptable limit, intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs), paired t-tests, and Pearson's coefficient correlation (r). Results: The limits of agreement for self-administered assessment were within the clinically acceptable limits. The average result of the face-to-face TUG test and the self-administered TUG test was 7.47 ± 2.45 and 7.57 ± 3.10 s, respectively. When comparing the two evaluations, they were strongly associated (r = 0.716, p < 0.001), with an excellent ICC of 0.82 (0.65-0.91), for a 95% confidence interval and significance level of 0.05 (p ≤ 0.05). Conclusions: The use of the self-administered TUG test for the screening of risk of fall, using low-cost technology, appears to be valid and reliable in community-dwelling adults aged 50 and above. Enabling older adults to perform the TUG test at home can empower them to take an active role in managing their health and ageing process, while also offering physiotherapists regular feedback for fall prevention.

社区居住老年人跌倒风险评估的自用计时起跑测试的效度和信度。
目的:本研究旨在通过与传统的由物理治疗师进行的面对面评估来评估自我管理的Timed Up and Go (TUG)测试的效度和可靠性,该测试是筛查跌倒风险的金标准。方法:对参加葡萄牙中部地区跌倒风险筛查行动的37名社区居住成年人(平均年龄61.78±6.88岁,其中73%为女性)进行评估。该方案包括社会人口学和跌倒史问题、运动自我效能问卷、与流动性相关的活动和参与概况(PAPM)以及三个功能测试,即10米步行速度(10-MWS)、TUG和30秒坐立(30秒STS)测试。在面对面测试后的18-24小时内,参与者被要求在家中自行进行TUG测试。采用一致性限、临床可接受限、类内相关系数(ICCs)、配对t检验和Pearson相关系数(r)对自用TUG试验的效度和信度进行检验。结果:自我评定的一致性范围在临床可接受范围内。面对面TUG测试的平均时间为7.47±2.45 s,自填TUG测试的平均时间为7.57±3.10 s。当比较两种评价时,它们是强相关的(r = 0.716, p < 0.001),良好的ICC为0.82(0.65-0.91),95%置信区间和显著性水平为0.05 (p≤0.05)。结论:在50岁及以上的社区居民中,使用低成本技术,使用自我管理的TUG测试来筛查跌倒风险似乎是有效和可靠的。允许老年人在家中进行TUG测试可以使他们在管理自己的健康和衰老过程中发挥积极作用,同时也为物理治疗师提供预防跌倒的定期反馈。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Geriatrics
Geriatrics 医学-老年医学
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
115
审稿时长
20.03 days
期刊介绍: • Geriatric biology • Geriatric health services research • Geriatric medicine research • Geriatric neurology, stroke, cognition and oncology • Geriatric surgery • Geriatric physical functioning, physical health and activity • Geriatric psychiatry and psychology • Geriatric nutrition • Geriatric epidemiology • Geriatric rehabilitation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信