使用双任务计时-起身-走测试预测体力活动,社区居住老年人跌倒-一项前瞻性研究。

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q4 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY
Journal of Aging and Physical Activity Pub Date : 2023-06-01 Print Date: 2023-12-01 DOI:10.1123/japa.2022-0341
Yujie Tong, Jifeng Rong, Xiaochun Tian, Yejun Wang, Zhengquan Chen, Roger Adams, Jeremy Witchalls, Gordon Waddington, Doa El-Ansary, Sam Wu, Oren Tirosh, Tao Wu, Jia Han
{"title":"使用双任务计时-起身-走测试预测体力活动,社区居住老年人跌倒-一项前瞻性研究。","authors":"Yujie Tong, Jifeng Rong, Xiaochun Tian, Yejun Wang, Zhengquan Chen, Roger Adams, Jeremy Witchalls, Gordon Waddington, Doa El-Ansary, Sam Wu, Oren Tirosh, Tao Wu, Jia Han","doi":"10.1123/japa.2022-0341","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This prospective study aimed to determine which specific mobility tests were the most accurate for predicting falls in physically active older adults living in the community. Seventy-nine physically active older adults who met the American College of Sports Medicine physical activity guidelines volunteered. Participants were assessed and followed up for 12 months. Mobility assessments included the 30-s sit-to-stand test, five times sit-to-stand test, single-task timed-up-and-go test (TUG), motor dual-task TUG (Mot-TUG), and cognitive dual-task TUG (Cog-TUG). Mot-TUG and Cog-TUG performances were moderately correlated with number of falls (r = .359, p < .01 and r = .372, p < .01, respectively). When Mot-TUG, Cog-TUG, or Age were included as fall predictors, discrimination scores represented by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were AUC (Mot-TUG) = 0.843 (p < .01), AUC (Cog-TUG) = 0.856 (p < .01), and AUC (Age) = 0.734 (p < .05). The cutoff point for Cog-TUG was 10.98 s, with test sensitivity of 1.00 and specificity of 0.66. Fall predictors for different populations may be based on different test methods. Here, the dual-task TUG test more accurately predicted falls in older adults who met American College of Sports Medicine's physical activity guidelines.</p>","PeriodicalId":51073,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Aging and Physical Activity","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Use of Dual-Task Timed-Up-and-Go Tests for Predicting Falls in Physically Active, Community-Dwelling Older Adults-A Prospective Study.\",\"authors\":\"Yujie Tong, Jifeng Rong, Xiaochun Tian, Yejun Wang, Zhengquan Chen, Roger Adams, Jeremy Witchalls, Gordon Waddington, Doa El-Ansary, Sam Wu, Oren Tirosh, Tao Wu, Jia Han\",\"doi\":\"10.1123/japa.2022-0341\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This prospective study aimed to determine which specific mobility tests were the most accurate for predicting falls in physically active older adults living in the community. Seventy-nine physically active older adults who met the American College of Sports Medicine physical activity guidelines volunteered. Participants were assessed and followed up for 12 months. Mobility assessments included the 30-s sit-to-stand test, five times sit-to-stand test, single-task timed-up-and-go test (TUG), motor dual-task TUG (Mot-TUG), and cognitive dual-task TUG (Cog-TUG). Mot-TUG and Cog-TUG performances were moderately correlated with number of falls (r = .359, p < .01 and r = .372, p < .01, respectively). When Mot-TUG, Cog-TUG, or Age were included as fall predictors, discrimination scores represented by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were AUC (Mot-TUG) = 0.843 (p < .01), AUC (Cog-TUG) = 0.856 (p < .01), and AUC (Age) = 0.734 (p < .05). The cutoff point for Cog-TUG was 10.98 s, with test sensitivity of 1.00 and specificity of 0.66. Fall predictors for different populations may be based on different test methods. Here, the dual-task TUG test more accurately predicted falls in older adults who met American College of Sports Medicine's physical activity guidelines.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51073,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Aging and Physical Activity\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Aging and Physical Activity\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1123/japa.2022-0341\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/12/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Print\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Aging and Physical Activity","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1123/japa.2022-0341","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/12/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"Print","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

这项前瞻性研究旨在确定哪种特定的活动能力测试最准确地预测生活在社区中体力活动的老年人的跌倒。79名符合美国运动医学学院体育活动指南的活跃老年人自愿参加。参与者接受了为期12个月的评估和随访。活动能力评估包括30秒坐立测试、5次坐立测试、单任务计时起身测试(TUG)、运动双任务TUG (Mot-TUG)和认知双任务TUG (Cog-TUG)。Mot-TUG和Cog-TUG表现与跌倒次数呈中度相关(r = 0.359, p < 0.01);当纳入Mot-TUG、Cog-TUG或Age作为跌倒预测因子时,以受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUC)表示的判别得分分别为AUC (Mot-TUG) = 0.843 (p < 0.01)、AUC (Cog-TUG) = 0.856 (p < 0.01)和AUC (Age) = 0.734 (p < 0.05)。Cog-TUG的截止点为10.98 s,灵敏度为1.00,特异度为0.66。不同人群的跌倒预测可能基于不同的测试方法。在这里,双重任务TUG测试更准确地预测了符合美国运动医学学院体育活动指南的老年人的跌倒。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Use of Dual-Task Timed-Up-and-Go Tests for Predicting Falls in Physically Active, Community-Dwelling Older Adults-A Prospective Study.

This prospective study aimed to determine which specific mobility tests were the most accurate for predicting falls in physically active older adults living in the community. Seventy-nine physically active older adults who met the American College of Sports Medicine physical activity guidelines volunteered. Participants were assessed and followed up for 12 months. Mobility assessments included the 30-s sit-to-stand test, five times sit-to-stand test, single-task timed-up-and-go test (TUG), motor dual-task TUG (Mot-TUG), and cognitive dual-task TUG (Cog-TUG). Mot-TUG and Cog-TUG performances were moderately correlated with number of falls (r = .359, p < .01 and r = .372, p < .01, respectively). When Mot-TUG, Cog-TUG, or Age were included as fall predictors, discrimination scores represented by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were AUC (Mot-TUG) = 0.843 (p < .01), AUC (Cog-TUG) = 0.856 (p < .01), and AUC (Age) = 0.734 (p < .05). The cutoff point for Cog-TUG was 10.98 s, with test sensitivity of 1.00 and specificity of 0.66. Fall predictors for different populations may be based on different test methods. Here, the dual-task TUG test more accurately predicted falls in older adults who met American College of Sports Medicine's physical activity guidelines.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
6.70%
发文量
105
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Aging and Physical Activity (JAPA) is a multidisciplinary journal that publishes peer-reviewed original research reports, scholarly reviews, and professional-application articles on the relationship between physical activity and the aging process. The journal encourages the submission of articles that can contribute to an understanding of (a) the impact of physical activity on physiological, psychological, and social aspects of older adults and (b) the effect of advancing age or the aging process on physical activity among older adults. In addition to publishing research reports and reviews, JAPA publishes articles that examine the development, implementation, and evaluation of physical activity programs among older adults. Articles from the biological, behavioral, and social sciences, as well as from fields such as medicine, clinical psychology, physical and recreational therapy, health, physical education, and recreation, are appropriate for the journal. Studies using animal models do not fit within our mission statement and should be submitted elsewhere.
×
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