| Literature DB >> 31664911 |
Naoto Kamide1,2, Yoshitaka Shiba3, Miki Sakamoto3, Haruhiko Sato3,4, Akie Kawamura3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Fall-related efficacy has been found to be associated with both falls and fall risk factors such as physical performance. The aim of the present study was to clarify whether fall-related efficacy is, independent of physical performance and other potential risk factors, associated with future falls in community-dwelling older people.Entities:
Keywords: Accidental falls; Aged; Fall-related efficacy; Japanese; Physical performance
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31664911 PMCID: PMC6820944 DOI: 10.1186/s12877-019-1318-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Geriatr ISSN: 1471-2318 Impact factor: 3.921
Participants’ characteristics and factors associated with the number of falls during 1-year follow-up
| Overall | Number of falls in 1 y | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RR | 95%CI | ||||
| Age (years) | mean ± SD | 71.4 ± 4.6 | NA | NA | NA |
| Sex (female) | n (%) | 180(75.9%) | NA | NA | NA |
| Body mass index (kg/m2) | mean ± SD | 22.3 ± 3.1 | 1.11 | 1.05: 1.18 | <0.001 |
| IADL (full marks) | n (%) | 220 (92.8%) | 0.57 | 0.27: 1.21 | 0.142 |
| Depressive symptom (≥2 points) | n (%) | 40(16.9%) | 1.93 | 1.14: 3.28 | 0.015 |
| Fall history (≥1 falls) | n (%) | 21(8.9%) | 2.91 | 1.64: 5.16 | <0.001 |
| Falls-related efficacy | |||||
| Short FES-I (points) | mean ± SD | 11.7 ± 3.6 | 1.09 | 1.03: 1.15 | 0.001 |
| Physical performance | mean ± SD | ||||
| 5CWT (sec) | mean ± SD | 3.4 ± 0.5 | 1.92 | 1.22: 3.03 | 0.005 |
| 5MWT (sec) | mean ± SD | 2.6 ± 0.4 | 1.44 | 0.82: 2.54 | 0.207 |
| FTSTS (sec) | mean ± SD | 6.4 ± 1.9 | 1.07 | 0.97: 1.17 | 0.193 |
| Grip strength (kg) | mean ± SD | 26.8 ± 6.4 | 0.94 | 0.89: 1.00 | 0.060 |
| TUGT (sec) | mean ± SD | 5.7 ± 0.9 | 1.25 | 1.00: 1.57 | 0.053 |
| Pain | |||||
| Knee pain | n (%) | 90(38.0%) | 2.39 | 1.48: 3.86 | <0.001 |
| Low back pain | n (%) | 84(35.4%) | 1.72 | 1.07: 2.77 | 0.025 |
| Medication and medical history | |||||
| Number of medications (types/day) | mean ± SD | 1.2 ± 1.0 | 1.32 | 1.06: 1.66 | 0.015 |
| Diabetes mellitus | n (%) | 22(9.3%) | 1.08 | 0.49: 2.40 | 0.844 |
| Heart disease | n (%) | 20(8.4%) | 2.03 | 1.03: 4.02 | 0.042 |
| Respiratory disease | n (%) | 17(7.2%) | 2.41 | 1.22: 4.76 | 0.011 |
| Stroke | n (%) | 7(3.0%) | 3.22 | 1.39: 7.45 | 0.006 |
NA Not applicable, RR relative risk adjusted for age and sex, 95%CI:95% confidence interval, IADL Instrumental Activities Of Daily Living, Short FES-I Short Falls Efficacy Scale International, 5CWT 5-m Comfortable Pace Walking Time, 5MWT 5-m Maximum Pace Walking Time, FTSTS 5 Times Sit To Stand Test, TUGT Timed Up And Go Test (sec)
Fig. 1Associations of the short FES-I and 5CWT with the number of falls. The bold line and the dashed line represent the score of the short FES-I and the 5-m Comfortable Pace Walking Time (5CWT), respectively. On Poisson regression analysis adjusted for all potential confounding factors, the short FES-I score increases significantly according to the increase in the number of falls (RR = 1.09, p = 0.015). On the other hand, 5CWT is not significantly associated with the number of falls (RR = 1.55, p = 0.055)
Associations among the short FES-I, physical performance tests, and number of falls
| Independent variable | Number of falls in 1 y | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| RR | 95%CI | p value | |
| Short FES-I and 5CWT | |||
| Short FES-I (points) | 1.09 | 1.02: 1.16 | 0.015 |
| 5CWT (sec) | 1.55 | 0.99: 2.41 | 0.055 |
| Goodness of fit test | χ2 = 205.25 (df = 223), | ||
| Short FES-I and 5MWT | |||
| Short FES-I (points) | 1.09 | 1.02: 1.16 | 0.016 |
| 5MWT (sec) | 1.08 | 0.62: 1.87 | 0.790 |
| Goodness of fit test | χ2 = 208.6 (df = 223), | ||
| Short FES-I and FTSTS | |||
| Short FES-I (points) | 1.09 | 1.02: 1.16 | 0.015 |
| FTSTS (sec) | 0.99 | 0.88: 1.12 | 0.924 |
| Goodness of fit test | χ2 = 208.7 (df = 223), p = 0.746 | ||
| Short FES-I and grip strength | |||
| Short FES-I (points) | 1.08 | 1.01: 1.16 | 0.023 |
| Grip strength (kg) | 0.97 | 0.91: 1.03 | 0.326 |
| Goodness of fit test | χ2 = 207.8 (df = 223), | ||
| Short FES-I and TUGT | |||
| Short FES-I (points) | 1.08 | 1.01: 1.16 | 0.018 |
| TUGT (sec) | 1.06 | 0.88: 1.35 | 0.655 |
| Goodness of fit test | χ2 = 208.5 (df = 223), | ||
RR relative risk adjusted for age, sex, BMI, depressive symptoms, fall history, knee pain, low back pain, number of medications, respiratory disease, heart disease, and stroke
95%CI 95% confidence interval, Short FES-I Short Falls Efficacy Scale International, 5CWT 5-m Comfortable Pace Walking Time, 5MWT 5-m Maximum Pace Walking Time, FTSTS 5 Times Sit To Stand Test, TUGT Timed Up And Go Test
Comparison of recurrent-fallers to non-recurrent fallers using ROC curves for the short FES-I and physical performance tests
| Sensitivity | Specificity | Cut off | AUC [95%CI] | p value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Short FES-I (points) | 0.600 | 0.644 | 13.00 | 0.652 [0.515: 0.789] | 0.030 |
| 5CWT (sec) | 0.933 | 0.324 | 3.15 | 0.631 [0.483: 0.779] | 0.082 |
| 5MWT (sec) | 0.800 | 0.311 | 2.45 | 0.518 [0.365: 0.672] | 0.814 |
| FTSTS (sec) | 0.467 | 0.775 | 7.20 | 0.569 [0.394: 0.743] | 0.442 |
| TUGT (sec) | 0.267 | 0.968 | 7.29 | 0.594 [0.425: 0.764] | 0.275 |
| Grip strength (kg) | 0.267 | 0.838 | 32.6 | 0.506 [0.341: 0.670] | 0.951 |
Short FES-I short Falls Efficacy Scale International, 5CWT 5-m Comfortable Pace Walking Time, 5MWT 5-m Maximum Pace Walking Time, FTSTS 5 Times Sit To Stand Test, TUGT Timed Up And Go Test
Fig. 2Scatter plot between the change in 5-m Maximum Pace Walking Time at 1-year and the short FES-I score. The short FES-I is significantly associated with the change in 5-m Maximum Pace Walking Time (5MWT) at 1-year on univariate and multivariate linear regression analyses. Age, sex, 5MWT at baseline, BMI, depressive symptoms, knee pain, and low back pain were set as the confounding factors in the multivariate linear regression analysis