TAIC: Student-led Exercise for Older Adults at Risk of Falling

Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Author(s):  
Oluwaseyi A. Osho ◽  
Cathy Harbidge ◽  
David B. Hogan ◽  
Patricia J. Manns ◽  
C. Allyson Jones

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S566-S567
Author(s):  
Elizabeth R Burns ◽  
Vicki J Pineau ◽  
Rosalind Koff ◽  
Sarah Hodge ◽  
Bess Welch

Abstract The STEADI initiative recommends screening older adults for falls annually using either the 12-item “Stay Independent” or the “three-key questions” screening tools. Both tools ask about falling in the preceding year. However, the comparative predictability of each tool has not been assessed. In response, CDC and NORC, assessed both tools’ ability to predict falls at six and twelve months. Adults 65+ (n=1900), were recruited from a nationally representative panel and were screened for fall risk at baseline using both tools and then followed for a year to determine if they fell. At baseline, 38% of older adults were categorized at-risk of falling based on the 12-item “Stay Independent” and 56% were considered at-risk based on the three-key questions. The history of falling question was excluded for the six month analyses. The “Stay Independent” identified 60% of fallers and the remaining two questions of the three-key questions identified 57% of fallers.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Pedro L Valenzuela ◽  
Nicola A Maffiuletti ◽  
Hugo Saner ◽  
Narayan Schütz ◽  
Beatrice Rudin ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Falls are a major concern for older adults and their care givers. The Timed Up and Go (TUG) test is extensively used to identify individuals at risk of falling, but less is known about the validity of simple isometric strength measures for this purpose. We aimed to assess the potential of isometric strength measures and the different modalities of the TUG test to detect individuals at risk of falling. Methods: Twenty-four community-dwelling older adults (≥ 65 years, 19 females, 88±7 years) performed three variations of the TUG test (standard, cognitive, motor) and three isometric strength tests (handgrip, knee extension and hip flexion) at baseline and at several time points (every ~6 weeks) during a 13-month follow-up. Linear mixed model analyses were then performed to examine differences between those who sustained ≥1 fall during the follow-up and those who did not. Results: Fallers had a worse performance in all TUG variations and a lower strength in all tests than non-fallers in non-adjusted analyses (p<0.05). However, when adjusting for baseline variables (age, gender, body mass index, and previous history of falls), only differences in handgrip and knee extension isometric strength measures remained significant (p=0.019 and p=0.042, respectively). Isometric strength measures related to changes in TUG performance both at baseline and during the follow-up (p<0.05). Conclusions: Isometric strength measures has potential to serve as a simple tool to detect individuals at risk of falling as compared to functional mobility measures (i.e. TUG test).


2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 257-263 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Lee ◽  
Graham Webb ◽  
Adam P. Shortland ◽  
Rebecca Edwards ◽  
Charlotte Wilce ◽  
...  

The Lancet ◽  
2000 ◽  
Vol 356 (9234) ◽  
pp. 1001-1002 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michel Raîche ◽  
Réjean Hébert ◽  
François Prince ◽  
Hélène Corriveau

2018 ◽  
Vol 31 (2) ◽  
pp. 293-293
Author(s):  
James Lee ◽  
Graham Webb ◽  
Adam P. Shortland ◽  
Rebecca Edwards ◽  
Charlotte Wilce ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document