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

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 [TUGcognitive], and TUG while carrying a full cup of water [TUGmanual]) 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.

Physical function measurements predict mortality in ambulatory older men

“…Although TUG has been examined mostly for evaluating balance, as a predictor of falls [30,31], there is some evidence for an association with mortality. Tice et al [23] found a strong association in postmenopausal women and Hoshide et al [32] reported a correlation between TUG and cardiovascular mortality in the very old subjects at least 80 years of age.…”

Low physical activity as a key differentiating factor in the potential high-risk profile for depressive symptoms in older adults

“…Basic mobility skills were measured using the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test (Podsiadlo & Richardson, 1991), which has shown good intertester and intratester reliability (r = .92-.99) and construct validity (Podsiadlo & Richardson, 1991;Shumway-Cook et al, 2000). The TUG test measures the time it takes for a subject to stand up from an armchair, walk 3 m straight forward, turn around, walk back to the chair, and sit down.…”

Investigation of the timed ‘Up & Go’ test in children

“…For social acceptance, these actions must be able to conform to the pace of peers. The TUG requires this level of motor control and it is commonly cited as a measure of functional or basic mobility (Shumway-Cook et al 2000, EeKhof et al 2001, Geiger et al 2001, as a test of balance (Habib et al 1999, Gill-Body et al 2000, and postural stability (Westcott et al 1997). In functional movement, measures of static and dynamic balance need to be differentiated and studied (De Weerdt and Spaepen 1999, p 211) and the TUG would appear to be an appropriate test for dynamic balance.…”

“…The timed 'Up & Go' test (TUG;Podsiadlo and Richardson 1991) is a quick and practical test that has been used widely in clinical practice as an outcome measure to assess basic or functional ambulatory mobility, or dynamic balance in adults (Shumway-Cook et al 2000, Creel et al 2001, Gray et al 2001, Morris et al 2001, Steffen et al 2002, Andersson et al 2003. However, its reliability and validity have not been investigated comprehensively in children.…”

“…The score is the time in seconds from the instruction 'go' to the person regaining their seat. The TUG has been shown to have high sensitivity and specificity as a test for older adults at risk of falls (Shumway-Cook et al 2000). Test-retest reliability and interrater reliability have been shown to be good in frail elderly persons (Podsiadlo and Richardson 1991) and those with Parkinson's disease (Morris et al 2001).…”