Literature DB >> 16764552

The Timed Up and Go Test does not predict length of stay on an acute geriatric ward.

Neesha Gan1, Julienne Large, David Basic, Natalie Jennings.   

Abstract

This study aimed to determine whether the admission Timed Up and Go Test (TUG) predicted the length of stay of patients in an acute geriatric ward. Consecutive patients were quasi-randomly allocated to either a model development sample or a model validation sample. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression was used to model length of stay. Variables considered for inclusion in the development model were risk factors for length of stay reported in the literature and univariate predictors from our dataset (p < 0.05). Variables selected for use in the development sample were then tested in the validation sample. Of 2463 patients of mean age 82.1 years, 932 (37.8%) were able to complete the TUG. Despite a significant, though weak, relationship between the length of stay and the TUG time (Spearman coefficient 0.18, p < 0.001), no time clearly identified patients with longer length of stay. Patients unable to complete the TUG had a median length of stay of 11 days (IQR 7 to 18), 40% longer than those able to complete the TUG (median 8 days, IQR 8 to 12, p < 0.001). Other significant (p < 0.05) predictors of length of stay in both samples were number of active medical diagnoses, referral from the emergency department, in-patient fall, and diagnosis of ulcer or infection. The admission TUG time should not be used to screen for patients likely to have longer lengths of stay. The value of the TUG lies in determining the patient's ability to complete it, rather than the time taken.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16764552     DOI: 10.1016/s0004-9514(06)70050-2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Aust J Physiother        ISSN: 0004-9514


  5 in total

1.  [Hierarchical assessment of balance and mobility : German translation and cross-cultural adaptation].

Authors:  Tobias Braun; Alina Rieckmann; Christian Grüneberg; Detlef Marks; Christian Thiel
Journal:  Z Gerontol Geriatr       Date:  2016-02-09       Impact factor: 1.281

2.  [German version of the de Morton mobility index. First clinical results from the process of the cross-cultural adaptation].

Authors:  T Braun; R-J Schulz; M Hoffmann; J Reinke; L Tofaute; C Urner; H Krämer; T Bock; N de Morton; C Grüneberg
Journal:  Z Gerontol Geriatr       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 1.281

3.  [The De Morton Mobility Index for evaluation of early geriatric rehabilitation].

Authors:  L Dasenbrock; T Berg; S Lurz; E Beimforde; R Diekmann; F Sobotka; J M Bauer
Journal:  Z Gerontol Geriatr       Date:  2016-06-03       Impact factor: 1.281

4.  A multicomponent approach to identify predictors of hospital outcomes in older in-patients: a multicentre, observational study.

Authors:  Stefanie L De Buyser; Mirko Petrovic; Youri E Taes; Davide L Vetrano; Graziano Onder
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-12-26       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Reliability of mobility measures in older medical patients with cognitive impairment.

Authors:  Tobias Braun; Christian Thiel; Ralf-Joachim Schulz; Christian Grüneberg
Journal:  BMC Geriatr       Date:  2019-01-23       Impact factor: 3.921

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.