HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when Rapid Responses are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Shumway-Cook, A. Articles by Woollacott, M. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Shumway-Cook, A. Articles by Woollacott, M.

Predicting the Probability for Falls in Community-Dwelling Older Adults Using the Timed Up & Go Test

A Shumway-Cook, PT, PhD, is Associate Professor, Division of Physical Therapy, University of Washington, Box 356490, Seattle, WA 98195 (USA) (ashumway{at}u.washington.edu). Address all correspondence to Dr Shumway-Cook
S Brauer, PT, PhD, is Postdoctoral Fellow, Department of Exercise and Movement Science, University of Oregon, Eugene, Ore
M Woollacott, PhD, is Professor and Chair, Department of Exercise and Movement Science, and Member, Institute of Neuroscience, University of Oregon

Submitted May 12, 1999; Accepted May 30, 2000

	Abstract

 
Background and Purpose. This study examined the sensitivity and specificity of the Timed Up & Go Test (TUG) under single-task versus dual-task conditions for identifying elderly individuals who are prone to falling. Subjects. Fifteen older adults with no history of falls (mean age=78 years, SD=6, range=65–85) and 15 older adults with a history of 2 or more falls in the previous 6 months (mean age=86.2 years, SD=6, range=76–95) participated. Methods. Time taken to complete the TUG under 3 conditions (TUG, TUG with a subtraction task [TUG_cognitive], and TUG while carrying a full cup of water [TUG_manual]) was measured. A multivariate analysis of variance and discriminant function and logistic regression analyses were performed. Results. The TUG was found to be a sensitive (sensitivity=87%) and specific (specificity=87%) measure for identifying elderly individuals who are prone to falls. For both groups of older adults, simultaneous performance of an additional task increased the time taken to complete the TUG, with the greatest effect in the older adults with a history of falls. The TUG scores with or without an additional task (cognitive or manual) were equivalent with respect to identifying fallers and nonfallers. Conclusions and Discussion. The results suggest that the TUG is a sensitive and specific measure for identifying community-dwelling adults who are at risk for falls. The ability to predict falls is not enhanced by adding a secondary task when performing the TUG.

Key Words: Balance • Fall prevention

	Introduction

Top Abstract Introduction Method Results Discussion and Conclusions References

 
The Timed Up & Go Test (TUG) is a test of balance that is commonly used to examine functional mobility in community-dwelling, frail older adults (aged 70–84 years).¹ The test requires a subject to stand up, walk 3 m (10 ft), turn, walk back, and sit down. Time taken to complete the test is strongly correlated to level of functional mobility.¹ Older adults who are able to complete the task in less than 20 seconds have been shown to be independent in transfer tasks involved in activities of daily living, have high scores on the Berg Balance Scale, and walk at gait speeds that should be sufficient for community mobility (0.5 m/s).¹ In contrast, older adults requiring 30 seconds or longer to complete the task tend to be more dependent in activities of daily living, require assistive devices for ambulation, and score lower on the Berg Balance Scale.¹

Although the TUG has been shown to be useful for predicting level of functional mobility, its validity for identifying community-dwelling older adults who are at risk for falls is unknown. Functional mobility is a term used to reflect the balance and gait maneuvers used in everyday life (eg, getting in and out of a chair, walking, turning).¹ Thus, one goal of our research was to determine the sensitivity and specificity of the TUG for predicting falls in community-dwelling older adults.

Recent research has suggested that assessment of balance under multi-task conditions may be a more sensitive indicator of balance problems and falls than assessment of balance in a single-task context.^2–5 Researchers using laboratory tests of balance under dual-task conditions have found that the ability to maintain stability can be affected by performance of concurrent cognitive tasks,^2–4 and this effect is enhanced in older adults with balance impairments and a recent history of falls.⁵

Lundin-Olsson and colleagues⁶ investigated the effect of performing multiple tasks on balance, mobility, and falls in frail older adults who lived in an institutional setting. Physical frailty is defined by severely impaired strength, mobility, balance, and endurance. They modified the TUG to add a manual task (TUG_manual) (ie, carrying a glass of water) and found that frail older adults who had a time difference of greater than 4.5 seconds between the TUG_manual and the TUG were more prone to falls during the following 6 months. They concluded that the difference in time between the TUG and TUG_manual is useful for identifying institutionalized elderly people who are prone to falls.⁶ Whether performance on the TUG in a dual-task condition is a useful measure for identifying community-dwelling older adults who are prone to falls is not known. Thus, another goal of our study was to determine whether, in community-dwelling older adults, the TUG performed under dual-task conditions was a more sensitive and specific predictor of falls than the TUG measure alone.

In a previous study using a simultaneous task paradigm, we studied the effects of 2 types of secondary tasks (a spatial orientation task versus a language task) on postural control during stance under 2 surface conditions (firm versus compliant).⁵ We compared the effects of these tasks on balance between a group of young adults (aged 24–44 years) and 2 groups of older adults (ie, those with a history of falls [aged 65–86 years] and those without a history of falls [aged 65–94 years]).⁵ In young adults, neither secondary task affected stability in stance. In contrast, in the older nonfallers, the effect of a secondary task was dependent on the difficulty of the postural task. In the less challenging postural condition (standing on a firm surface), neither cognitive task affected balance; however, there was a significant increase in postural sway when cognitive tasks were performed in the more challenging postural condition (standing on a compliant foam surface). Finally, the older adults with balance problems and a history of recurrent falls swayed more when performing either secondary task even in the less challenging postural condition. Results from that study suggest that the effect of a secondary task on postural control was dependent on the balance abilities of the subject, the difficulty of the balance task, and the type of secondary task being performed.⁵ The effects of different types of secondary tasks on functional mobility have not been determined. Certain types of secondary tasks performed in conjunction with the TUG may be more sensitive predictors of falls than others. Therefore, another goal of this study was to compare the sensitivity and specificity of 2 conditions of TUG performance (cognitive versus manual) in identifying community-dwelling older adults who are at risk for falls.

Our hypotheses were (1) that, although the TUG itself would be a sensitive predictor of falls, the dual-task TUG would be a more sensitive predictor of falls than the TUG alone and (2) that the TUG with the addition of a cognitive task (TUG_cognitive) would be a more specific and sensitive predictor of falls than the TUG_manual.

	Method

Top Abstract Introduction Method Results Discussion and Conclusions References

 
Subjects

Thirty community-dwelling older adults living in the greater Seattle area were enrolled in the study after giving informed consent. The participants were volunteers recruited from subjects involved in previous aging studies that were carried out by the first author. The participants were 15 older adults with no history of falls (mean age=78 years, SD=6, range=65–85) and 15 older adults with a history of 2 or more falls in the previous 6 months (mean age=86.2 years, SD=6, range=76–95). The inclusion criteria were that the subjects had to be aged 65 years or older, living independently in the community, able to walk 9.1 m (30 ft) with or without an assistive device but without the assistance of another person, able to follow simple instructions, and able to carry a cup by a handle.

Criteria for inclusion in the group of older adults with a history of falls included a self-report of 2 or more falls within the past 6 months. A fall was defined as any event that led to an unplanned, unexpected contact with a supporting surface. We excluded falls resulting from unavoidable environmental hazards such as a chair collapsing. In addition, we excluded people who had only 1 fall within 6 months in order to maximize the possibility of selecting a sample of older adults with recurrent fall problems. Further criteria for the older adults in the faller category included an absence of known neurological or musculoskeletal diagnosis that could account for possible imbalance and falls, such as cerebrovascular accident, Parkinson disease, cardiac problems, transient ischemic attacks, or lower-extremity joint replacements.

Procedure

After informed consent was obtained, subjects completed a health status questionnaire providing information on age, residential status, marital status, medical history, current coexisting medical conditions, self-reported history of imbalance, type of assistive device used for ambulation, and use of prescription medications. This information was used to characterize the demographics and health status of subjects participating in the study. In order to verify our classification of the 2 groups based on balance abilities, balance was measured using 1 self-report instrument and 2 performance-based measures. The Activities-specific Balance Confidence Scale (ABC) is a self-report measure of balance that people can use to rate their perceived confidence related to balance when performing common activities of daily living.⁷ We asked our subjects to use the ABC to rate their degree of confidence (1=no confidence to 10=full confidence) in performing 10 basic activities of daily living and instrumental activities of daily living without fear of loss of balance. The result was a score ranging from 10 to 100. In a previous study examining the psychometric properties of the ABC on 102 older adults living in the community, the ABC test-retest correlation (r) was .92 (P<.001), indicating good test-retest reliability; the Cronbach alpha was .96, indicating high internal consistency.⁷ The test did not discriminate fall status among community-dwelling older adults.⁷

Subjects then underwent a 45-minute performance-based evaluation of balance and mobility function. Balance was evaluated using the Berg Balance Scale, which rates performance from 0 (cannot perform) to 4 (normal performance) on 14 different tasks, including ability to sit, stand, reach, lean over, turn and look over each shoulder, turn in a complete circle, and step.⁸ The total possible score on the Berg Balance Scale is 56, which is supposed to indicate excellent balance. The Berg Balance Scale has been shown to yield measurements with excellent interrater and test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC]=.98 and .97, respectively) and good internal consistency (Cronbach alpha=.96).⁸ Scores obtained from the Berg Balance Scale been shown to be correlated with scores obtained from other tests of balance and mobility, including the Tinetti Mobility Index (r =–.91) and the Get Up & Go Test (r =–.76).⁹

Mobility was evaluated by asking subjects to walk for 3 minutes at their preferred speed. Distance walked was measured, and speed for self-paced gait was determined. Subject demographics and clinical test results are summarized in Table 1.

Data Analysis

Two raters measured performance by timing the TUG in all 3 conditions. Interrater reliability as measured with an ICC (3,3) was high, with r_i=.98, .99, and .99 for the TUG, TUG_manual, and TUG_cognitive, respectively.¹⁰ As a result, further analyses were performed on the data obtained from one rater only. Histograms and descriptive statistics were calculated to determine distributions, detect outliers, and consider the need for transformations. A logarithmic transformation was performed on time data due to nonnormality, the result of positively skewed data.

A multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was then performed to determine whether group differences existed on the transformed time measures. Scores were averaged over the 3 trials. In cases where the MANOVA demonstrated a difference (P<.05), a post hoc within-subject analysis was performed. To determine the ability of the TUG performed under the 3 conditions to predict faller versus nonfaller group membership, cross-validated discriminant function analyses were performed on 5 variables: the 3 transformed timed measures and 2 difference measures (TUG_manual–TUG and TUG_cognitive–TUG). A prior probability of classifying an older adult as a faller was set at 35%, based on falls rate literature.^11,12

A logistic regression procedure was used to determine the cutoff value for each timed test that maximized sensitivity and specificity and predicted the probability of fallers at .5 or greater. All of these analyses were performed with SAS 6.12.¹³,^* The Pearson product moment correlation coefficient (r) was used in bivariate correlations, and a 3-way analysis of variance was performed to compare demographics across the 2 groups. These analyses were performed using SPSS 8.0.^14,

	Results

Top Abstract Introduction Method Results Discussion and Conclusions References

 
Results from the MANOVA showed that the older adults with a history of falls were slower (F=22.97, P<.001) than the older adults without a history of falls in all 3 conditions (TUG, TUG_cognitive, and TUG_manual). Table 2 compares the time taken to complete the TUG in all 3 conditions for both groups of subjects.

View larger version (7K): [in this window] [in a new window] Figure 1. Comparison of the time taken to complete the Timed Up & Go Test (TUG) as a function of the assistive device used for ambulation.

View larger version (20K): [in this window] [in a new window] Figure 2. Comparison of the performance of individuals within the group of older adults without a history of falls and the group of older adults with a history of falls on the 3 tasks (Timed Up & Go Test [TUG] alone, TUG with addition of a cognitive task [TUGcognitive], and TUG with addition of a manual task [TUGmanual]).

View larger version (13K): [in this window] [in a new window] Figure 3. The time taken to perform the Timed Up & Go Test (TUG), TUG with addition of a manual task (TUGmanual), and TUG with addition of a cognitive task (TUGcognitive) as a function of probability of predicting elderly individuals who are prone to falls.

	Discussion and Conclusions

Top Abstract Introduction Method Results Discussion and Conclusions References

Our finding that all 3 tests (TUG, TUG_manual, and TUG_cognitive) were comparable in determining the likelihood of falling in community-dwelling older adults did not support our hypothesis that measurement of mobility under multi-task conditions would be a more sensitive indicator of likelihood for falls. In addition, difference scores (eg, TUG_manual–TUG) did not increase the ability to identify community-dwelling older adults who are prone to falls. This finding is not consistent with LundinOlsson and colleagues'⁶ finding that comparing mobility performance between single-task and dual-task conditions was a more useful way of predicting future falls in institutionalized elderly people. There are 2 dissimilarities between these studies that could explain these differences. First, Lundin-Olsson and colleagues studied a population of frail older adults living in an assisted-living environment. We examined older adults who, despite having balance impairments, were living independently within the community. Second, in LundinOlsson and colleagues' study, predictors of future falls were sought. In contrast, we were looking for measures that are useful for identifying individuals with a likelihood of falling. It may be that, although difference scores are not useful in a discriminate function, they may remain useful as predictors of future falls in some populations of elderly individuals.

Effect of Multiple Tasks on Mobility in Elderly People Who Are Prone to Falls

Results from this study confirm that simultaneous performance of a secondary task had a deleterious effect on functional mobility. The addition of a secondary task increased the time taken to complete the TUG by 22% to 25%. This effect was independent of the type of secondary task performed (either manual or cognitive). These findings do not support our hypothesis that cognitive tasks would affect mobility more than manual tasks.

Clinical Implications

Given the incidence and consequences of falls among older adults, screening methods that identify elderly individuals who are prone to falls and who may benefit from interventions designed to improve balance and decrease falls and risk for falls are critical. Results from our study suggest that the TUG is a simple screening test that is a sensitive and specific measure of probability for falls among older adults.

	Footnotes

 
All authors provided concept/research design, writing, data collection and analysis, fund procurement, subjects, facilities and equipment, and institutional liaisons. The authors acknowledge Robin High, Statistical Consultant, for his statistical expertise.

The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Northwest Hospital, Seattle, Wash.

This investigation was supported by a grant from the Foundation for Physical Therapy to Dr Shumway-Cook and by National Institute on Aging grant AG-05317 to Dr Woollacott.

^* SAS Institute Inc, PO Box 8000, Cary, NC 27511.

SPSS Inc, 444 N Michigan Ave, Chicago, IL 60611.

	References

Top Abstract Introduction Method Results Discussion and Conclusions References

 

1. Podsiadlo D, Richardson S. The timed "Up & Go": a test of basic functional mobility for frail elderly persons. J Am Geriatr Soc.1991; 39:142–148.[ISI][Medline]
2. Guerts ACH, Mulder TW, Nienhuis B, Rijken RAJ. Dual task assessment of reorganization in persons with lower limb amputation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil.1991; 72:1059–1064.[ISI][Medline]
3. LaJoie Y, Teasdale N, Bard C, Fleury M. Attentional demands for static and dynamic equilibrium. Exp Brain Res.1993; 97:139–144.[ISI][Medline]
4. Lundin-Olsson L, Nyberg L, Gustafson Y. "Stops walking when talking" as a predictor of falls in elderly people. Lancet.1997; 349(9052):617.
5. Shumway-Cook A, Woollacott M, Kerns KA, Baldwin M. The effects of two types of cognitive tasks on postural stability in older adults with and without a history of falls. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci.1997; 52:M232–M240.[Abstract]
6. Lundin-Olsson L, Nyberg L, Gustafson Y. Attention, frailty, and falls: the effect of a manual task on basic mobility. J Am Geriatr Soc.1998; 46:758–761.[ISI][Medline]
7. Powell LE, Myers AM. The Activities-specific Balance Confidence (ABC) Scale. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci.1995 :50:M28–M34.[Abstract]
8. Berg KO, Wood-Dauphinee SL, Williams JI, Gayton D. Measuring balance in the elderly: preliminary development of an instrument. Physiotherapy Canada.1989; 41:304–311.
9. Berg KO, Wood-Dauphinee SL, Williams JT, et al. Measuring balance in the elderly: validation of an instrument. Can J Public Health.1992; 83(suppl 2):S7–S11.
10. Shrout PE, Fleiss JL. Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull.1979; 86:420–428.[ISI]
11. Lach HW, Reed AT, Arfken CL, et al. Falls in the elderly: reliability of a classification system. J Am Geriatr Soc.1991; 39:197–202.[ISI][Medline]
12. Reinsch S, McRae P, Lachenbruch PA, Tobis JS. Attempts to prevent falls and injury: a prospective community study. The Gerontologist.1992; 32:450–456.[Abstract]
13. SAS/STAT Version 6.12. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc;1996 .
14. SPSS for Windows: Advanced Statistics, Release 8.0. Chicago, Ill: SPSS Inc;1998 .

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. Bouwen, J. De Lepeleire, and F. Buntinx Rate of accidental falls in institutionalised older people with and without cognitive impairment halved as a result of a staff-oriented intervention Age Ageing, May 1, 2008; 37(3): 306 - 310. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. E Dibble, J. Christensen, D J. Ballard, and K B. Foreman Diagnosis of Fall Risk in Parkinson Disease: An Analysis of Individual and Collective Clinical Balance Test Interpretation Physical Therapy, March 1, 2008; 88(3): 323 - 332. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Shumway-Cook, I. F. Silver, M. LeMier, S. York, P. Cummings, and T. D. Koepsell Effectiveness of a Community-Based Multifactorial Intervention on Falls and Fall Risk Factors in Community-Living Older Adults: A Randomized, Controlled Trial J. Gerontol. A Biol. Sci. Med. Sci., December 1, 2007; 62(12): 1420 - 1427. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. Sumukadas MBBS MD, M. D. Witham MBChB PhD, A. D. Struthers MBChB MD, and M. E.T. McMurdo MBChB MD Effect of perindopril on physical function in elderly people with functional impairment: a randomized controlled trial Can. Med. Assoc. J., October 9, 2007; 177(8): 867 - 874. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				I. Melzer, I. Kurz, D. Shahar, M. Levi, and L. Oddsson Application of the voluntary step execution test to identify elderly fallers Age Ageing, September 1, 2007; 36(5): 532 - 537. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. Johnson, J. G. Buckley, A. J. Scally, and D. B. Elliott Multifocal Spectacles Increase Variability in Toe Clearance and Risk of Tripping in the Elderly Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci., April 1, 2007; 48(4): 1466 - 1471. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. Rockwood, D. Jones, Y. Wang, D. Carver, and A. Mitnitski Failure to complete performance-based measures is associated with poor health status and an increased risk of death Age Ageing, March 1, 2007; 36(2): 225 - 228. [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. Morris, R. H. Harwood, R. Baker, O. Sahota, S. Armstrong, and T. Masud A comparison of different balance tests in the prediction of falls in older women with vertebral fractures: a cohort study Age Ageing, January 1, 2007; 36(1): 78 - 83. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. T Kristensen, N. B Foss, and H. Kehlet Timed "Up & Go" Test as a Predictor of Falls Within 6 Months After Hip Fracture Surgery Physical Therapy, January 1, 2007; 87(1): 24 - 30. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Schenkman, J. E Deutsch, and K. M Gill-Body An Integrated Framework for Decision Making in Neurologic Physical Therapist Practice Physical Therapy, December 1, 2006; 86(12): 1681 - 1702. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				Y.-P. Chiu, S. L Fritz, K. E Light, and C. A Velozo Use of Item Response Analysis to Investigate Measurement Properties and Clinical Validity of Data for the Dynamic Gait Index Physical Therapy, June 1, 2006; 86(6): 778 - 787. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. Nordin, E. Rosendahl, and L. Lundin-Olsson Timed "Up & Go" Test: Reliability in Older People Dependent in Activities of Daily Living-- Focus on Cognitive State Physical Therapy, May 1, 2006; 86(5): 646 - 655. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				E. Aydog, R. Depedibi, A. Bal, E. Eksioglu, E. Unlu, and A. Cakci Dynamic postural balance in ankylosing spondylitis patients Rheumatology, April 1, 2006; 45(4): 445 - 448. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C Toulotte, A Thevenon, E Watelain, and C Fabre Identification of healthy elderly fallers and non-fallers by gait analysis under dual-task conditions Clinical Rehabilitation, March 1, 2006; 20(3): 269 - 276. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. Silsupadol, K.-C. Siu, A. Shumway-Cook, and M. H Woollacott Training of Balance Under Single- and Dual-Task Conditions in Older Adults With Balance Impairment Physical Therapy, February 1, 2006; 86(2): 269 - 281. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				N. B. Alexander, J. A. Ashton-Miller, B. Giordani, K. Guire, and A. B. Schultz Age Differences in Timed Accurate Stepping With Increasing Cognitive and Visual Demand: A Walking Trail Making Test J. Gerontol. A Biol. Sci. Med. Sci., December 1, 2005; 60(12): 1558 - 1562. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. C. Whitney, S. R. Lord, and J. C. T. Close Streamlining assessment and intervention in a falls clinic using the Timed Up and Go Test and Physiological Profile Assessments Age Ageing, November 1, 2005; 34(6): 567 - 571. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Pajala, P. Era, M. Koskenvuo, J. Kaprio, M. Alen, A. Tolvanen, K. Tiainen, and T. Rantanen Contribution of Genetic and Environmental Factors to Individual Differences in Maximal Walking Speed With and Without Second Task in Older Women J. Gerontol. A Biol. Sci. Med. Sci., October 1, 2005; 60(10): 1299 - 1303. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. E. Talkowski, M. S. Redfern, J. R. Jennings, and J. M. Furman Cognitive Requirements for Vestibular and Ocular Motor Processing in Healthy Adults and Patients with Unilateral Vestibular Lesions J. Cogn. Neurosci., September 1, 2005; 17(9): 1432 - 1441. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A Bergland and T B Wyller Risk factors for serious fall related injury in elderly women living at home Inj. Prev., October 1, 2004; 10(5): 308 - 313. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. M Wrisley, G. F Marchetti, D. K Kuharsky, and S. L Whitney Reliability, Internal Consistency, and Validity of Data Obtained With the Functional Gait Assessment Physical Therapy, October 1, 2004; 84(10): 906 - 918. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. L Lewis, M. Moutoux, M. Slaughter, and S. P Bailey Characteristics of Individuals Who Fell While Receiving Home Health Services Physical Therapy, January 1, 2004; 84(1): 23 - 32. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Hatch, K. M Gill-Body, and L. G Portney Determinants of Balance Confidence in Community-Dwelling Elderly People Physical Therapy, December 1, 2003; 83(12): 1072 - 1079. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. L. Roberts FALLS: WHAT A TANGLED WEB Gerontologist, August 1, 2003; 43(4): 598 - 601. [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. C. LaStayo, G. A. Ewy, D. D. Pierotti, R. K. Johns, and S. Lindstedt The Positive Effects of Negative Work: Increased Muscle Strength and Decreased Fall Risk in a Frail Elderly Population J. Gerontol. A Biol. Sci. Med. Sci., May 1, 2003; 58(5): M419 - 424. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. K Boulgarides, S. M McGinty, J. A Willett, and C. W Barnes Use of Clinical and Impairment-Based Tests to Predict Falls by Community-Dwelling Older Adults Physical Therapy, April 1, 2003; 83(4): 328 - 339. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				R. S. Hinman, K. L. Bennell, B. R. Metcalf, and K. M. Crossley Balance impairments in individuals with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis: a comparison with matched controls using clinical tests Rheumatology, December 1, 2002; 41(12): 1388 - 1394. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Shumway-Cook, A. E Patla, A. Stewart, L. Ferrucci, M. A Ciol, and J. M Guralnik Environmental Demands Associated With Community Mobility in Older Adults With and Without Mobility Disabilities Physical Therapy, July 1, 2002; 82(7): 670 - 681. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. M Steffen, T. A Hacker, and L. Mollinger Age- and Gender-Related Test Performance in Community-Dwelling Elderly People: Six-Minute Walk Test, Berg Balance Scale, Timed Up & Go Test, and Gait Speeds Physical Therapy, February 1, 2002; 82(2): 128 - 137. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. L. Perell, A. Nelson, R. L. Goldman, S. L. Luther, N. Prieto-Lewis, and L. Z. Rubenstein Fall Risk Assessment Measures: An Analytic Review J. Gerontol. A Biol. Sci. Med. Sci., December 1, 2001; 56(12): M761 - 766. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. M VanSwearingen and J. S Brach Making Geriatric Assessment Work: Selecting Useful Measures Physical Therapy, June 1, 2001; 81(6): 1233 - 1252. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article Abstract Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when Rapid Responses are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services