Boonsinsukh Rumpa, Khumnonchai Bodin, Saengsirisuwan Vitoon, Chaikeeree Nithinun
Faculty of Physical Therapy, Srinakharinwirot University, Nakhon Nayok, Thailand.
Faculty of Physical Therapy and Sport Medicine, Rangsit University, Pathum Thani, Thailand.
Hong Kong Physiother J. 2020 Dec;40(2):133-143. doi: 10.1142/S1013702520500134. Epub 2020 Jul 25.
The type of foam pad used in the modified Clinical Test of Sensory Interaction and Balance (mCTSIB) influences the accuracy with which elderly fallers are identified. Two types of foam are commonly used in practice: Airex and Neurocom foam.
The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy with which elderly fallers can be identified when the Airex foam and Neurocom foam are used in the mCTSIB.
One hundred eighty-four elderly participants with a mean age of 69 years were classified into faller and nonfaller groups based on their 12-month fall history. Balance stability was measured under four conditions of the mCTSIB for 120 s each: standing on a floor or a foam pad with their eyes open or eyes closed. The time needed to maintain stability was measured by a stopwatch, and postural sway characteristics were measured using an acceleration-based system. Comparisons between groups were performed by two-way mixed ANOVA. The accuracy of differentiating elderly fallers from nonfallers with different foam types was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC) analysis. The time to maintain stability under four conditions of the mCTSIB (composite score) and under two conditions on the foam (foam score) were used for the ROC analysis.
The results showed that the nonfallers required more time to maintain stability and had a smaller sway area than the fallers ( ). The foam led to a larger difference between groups, suggesting the use of foam in examining the risk of falls. The Airex and the Neurocom foam pads led to a large area under the curve (0.93 to 0.95) in identifying elderly fallers and nonfallers when the composite and foam scores were used. A cutoff score of 447/480 s for the composite score and 223/240 s for the foam score yielded a posttest accuracy of 88% to 89%, with a sensitivity of 0.80-0.92 and specificity of 0.88-0.95.
In conclusion, Airex and Neurocom foam can be used interchangeably with guidance in the mCTSIB, as they led to the accurate identification of elderly fallers among older persons who could walk and live independently in the community.
改良版感觉交互与平衡临床测试(mCTSIB)中使用的泡沫垫类型会影响老年跌倒者识别的准确性。在实际应用中通常使用两种类型的泡沫:Airex泡沫和Neurocom泡沫。
本研究的目的是评估在mCTSIB中使用Airex泡沫和Neurocom泡沫时识别老年跌倒者的准确性。
184名平均年龄为69岁的老年参与者根据其12个月的跌倒史分为跌倒者组和非跌倒者组。在mCTSIB的四种条件下,每种条件持续120秒测量平衡稳定性:睁眼或闭眼站在地板或泡沫垫上。用秒表测量保持稳定所需的时间,并用基于加速度的系统测量姿势摆动特征。组间比较采用双向混合方差分析。使用受试者工作特征曲线(ROC)分析评估不同泡沫类型区分老年跌倒者和非跌倒者的准确性。mCTSIB四种条件下(综合评分)和泡沫上两种条件下(泡沫评分)保持稳定的时间用于ROC分析。
结果显示,非跌倒者比跌倒者需要更多时间来保持稳定,并且摆动面积更小( )。泡沫导致组间差异更大,表明在检查跌倒风险时使用泡沫。当使用综合评分和泡沫评分时,Airex泡沫垫和Neurocom泡沫垫在识别老年跌倒者和非跌倒者时曲线下面积较大(0.93至0.95)。综合评分的截止分数为447/480秒,泡沫评分为223/240秒,测试后准确率为88%至89%,敏感性为0.80 - 0.92,特异性为0.88 - 0.95。
总之,在mCTSIB中,Airex泡沫和Neurocom泡沫在有指导的情况下可以互换使用,因为它们能够准确识别社区中能够独立行走和生活的老年人中的跌倒者。