Seinsche Julia, Kyprianou Elena, de Bruin Eling D, Saibene Enrico, Rizzo Francesco, Carpinella Ilaria, Lutz Lisa, Ferrarin Maurizio, Villa Riccardo, Chrysostomou Savvina, Moza Sotiria, Giannouli Eleftheria
Department of Health Sciences and Technology, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Materia Group, Nicosia, Cyprus.
Geroscience. 2025 Feb;47(1):1139-1150. doi: 10.1007/s11357-024-01313-x. Epub 2024 Aug 9.
In older populations, sensitive fall risk assessment tools are important to timely intervene and prevent falls. Instrumented assessments have shown to be superior to standardized fall risk assessments such as the Timed Up and Go Test (TUG) and should capture both motor and cognitive functions. Therefore, the aim was to test novel instrumented assessments with and without a cognitive component. One hundred thirty-seven older adults aged 73.1 ± 7.3 years, 38 categorized as fallers and 99 as non-fallers, conducted five instrumented assessments on the Dividat Senso, a pressure sensitive stepping platform, and three standardized geriatric assessments (TUG, TUG-dual task, 30-s Sit-to-Stand Test (STS)). T-tests were applied to compare the test performance of fallers versus non-fallers. Furthermore, logistic regression analyses and area under the curve (AUC) analyses were performed. Statistically significant differences between fallers and non-fallers were found in the Go/No-Go test (p = .001, d = .72), the TUG (p = .014, d = .48), and the STS (p = .008, d = .51). Only the Go/No-Go test contributed significantly to all regression models. Significant AUC values were found for the Reaction Time Test (RTT) (AUC = .628, p = .023), Go/No-Go (AUC = .673, p = .002), TUG (AUC = .642, p = .012), and STS (AUC = .690, p = .001). The Go/No-Go test measuring inhibition showed the best discriminative ability suggesting added value of instrumented assessments with a cognitive component for clinical fall risk assessment in relatively healthy older adults. The study should be extended with a frailer population, in which TUG and the other instrumented assessments are possibly good predictors as well.
在老年人群中，敏感的跌倒风险评估工具对于及时干预和预防跌倒至关重要。仪器化评估已被证明优于标准化的跌倒风险评估，如定时起立行走测试（TUG），并且应同时捕捉运动和认知功能。因此，目的是测试有无认知成分的新型仪器化评估。137名年龄在73.1±7.3岁的老年人，其中38人被归类为跌倒者，99人被归类为非跌倒者，在Dividat Senso（一个压力敏感步进平台）上进行了五项仪器化评估，并进行了三项标准化老年评估（TUG、TUG-双重任务、30秒坐立测试（STS））。应用t检验比较跌倒者与非跌倒者的测试表现。此外，进行了逻辑回归分析和曲线下面积（AUC）分析。在Go/No-Go测试（p = 0.001，d = 0.72）、TUG（p = 0.014，d = 0.48）和STS（p = 0.008，d = 0.51）中发现跌倒者与非跌倒者之间存在统计学显著差异。只有Go/No-Go测试对所有回归模型有显著贡献。反应时间测试（RTT）（AUC = 0.628，p = 0.023）、Go/No-Go（AUC = 0.673，p = 0.002）、TUG（AUC = 0.642，p = 0.012）和STS（AUC = （0.690，p = 0.001）发现了显著的AUC值。测量抑制的Go/No-Go测试显示出最佳的判别能力，表明具有认知成分的仪器化评估对相对健康的老年人临床跌倒风险评估具有附加价值。该研究应扩展到更虚弱的人群，在其中TUG和其他仪器化评估也可能是良好的预测指标。
