Reliability and validity of an adapted hip abductor strength measure as a potential new fall risk assessment for older persons: a study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Persons aged ≥ 65 years are currently the world's fastest growing age group. An important complication of age is the increasing risk of falls. Falls have multifactorial etiology and modifiable risk factors open for interventions in prevention and rehabilitation, are of high interest. In this context, strong hip abductors seem to be important to prevent falls. A newly adapted measurement device to measure hip abductor strength (HAS) in a closed chain position was developed. We aim to assess feasibility, intra- and inter-tester reliability and construct and criterion validity of the new measure. METHODS: In two subsequent parts a feasibility, reliability and validity study with an adapted measurement instrument for the assessment of HAS (index test) in a closed chain position in persons aged ≥ 65 years will be conducted. Part I investigates feasibility of the measure in clinical settings as well as reliability of the new HAS test (n = 26). Part II evaluates construct and criterion validity (n = 169). Construct validity will be assessed cross-sectional, criterion validity by comparison with prospectively followed up fall history for 12 months (external criterion) and other functional fall risk assessments (Short Physical Performance Battery, Timed Up and Go test, usual gait speed and hand grip strength). DISCUSSION: Results of feasibility, will give insight in its applicability in daily clinical life and clinimetric properties will show if measurements of HAS in a closed chain position should be encouraged to include in fall risk assessments in older adults.

Reliability and measurement error of sensorimotor tests in patients with neck pain: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Neck pain is one of the leading causes of years lived with disability, and approximately half of people with neck pain experience recurrent episodes. Deficits in the sensorimotor system can persist even after pain relief, which may contribute to the chronic course of neck pain in some patients. Evaluation of sensorimotor capacities in patients with neck pain is therefore important. No consensus exists on how sensorimotor capacities of the neck should be assessed in physiotherapy. The aims of this systematic review are: (a) to provide an overview of tests used in physiotherapy for assessment of sensorimotor capacities in patients with neck pain; and (b) to provide information about reliability and measurement error of these tests, to enable physiotherapists to select appropriate tests. METHODS: Medline, CINAHL, Embase and PsycINFO databases were searched for studies reporting data on the reliability and/or measurement error of sensorimotor tests in patients with neck pain. The results for reliability and measurement error were compared against the criteria for good measurement properties. The quality of evidence was assessed according to the modified GRADE method proposed by the COSMIN group. RESULTS: A total of 206 tests for assessment of sensorimotor capacities of the neck were identified and categorized into 18 groups of tests. The included tests did not cover all aspects of the sensorimotor system; tests for the sensory and motor components were identified, but not for the central integration component. Furthermore, no data were found on reliability or measurement error for some tests that are used in practice, such as movement control tests, which apply to the motor component. Approximately half of the tests showed good reliability, and 12 were rated as having good (+) reliability. However, tests that evaluated complex movements, which are more difficult to standardize, were less reliable. Measurement error could not be evaluated because the minimal clinically important change was not available for all tests. CONCLUSION: Overall, the quality of evidence is not yet high enough to enable clear recommendations about which tests to use to assess the sensorimotor capacities of the neck.

Reliability and Diagnostic Accuracy of Commonly Used Performance Tests Relative to Fall History in Older Persons: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Early detection of fall risk is crucial for targeted fall prevention and rehabilitation. This systematic review facilitates decision-making concerning the optimal choice for a suitable fall risk assessment test for older persons in four different settings. This systematic review provides an overview of reliability and diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity [SE], specificity, likelihood ratios, and post-test probabilities) of commonly used performance measures to assess older persons' fall risk. METHODS: Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full texts of all articles identified through a systematic search on the PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and Web of Science databases. The methodological quality was critically appraised using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool and the COSMIN risk of bias tool. Due to a setting-dependent fall risk, four relevant settings were selected for the analyses: 1) community dwelling, 2) nursing home, 3) hospital, and 4) the combined setting of hospitalized and community-dwelling persons. RESULTS: Recommendations for diagnostic accuracy can be made for the specific settings: setting 1) mini-balance evaluation system test, timed up and go test with fast speed (TUG FAST), cognitive TUG FAST, functional reach test, and fast gait speed; 2) TUG at usual speed; 3) none of the included tests; and 4) some hip muscle strength and hand grip strength tests might be recommended. CONCLUSION: The review's results are applicable for use in clinical practice, both on a population and on an individual level for patients and caregivers. Most measures' reliability is sufficient. However, the included tests' discriminative ability is not optimal for clinical use in relevant settings. The low sample sizes of most of the included studies and a limited amount of studies in all but the community-dwelling setting hinder us from making strong recommendations.

The Role of Hip Abductor Strength in Identifying Older Persons at Risk of Falls: A Diagnostic Accuracy Study.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Early detection of fall risk in persons older than 65 is of clinical relevance, but the diagnostic accuracy of currently used functional tests (eg short physical performance battery [SPPB] and timed up and go test [TUG]) to assess older persons' fall risks remains moderate. Recent literature highlights the importance of strong hip abductors to prevent falls. We thus aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of hip abductor strength measures to assess older persons' fall risks. METHODS: Hip abductor maximum voluntary isometric strength (ABD MVIS), rate of force generation (ABD RFG), and the SPPB and TUG functional fall risk assessments were assessed in 60 persons aged over 65 years (82.0 ± 6.1 years). The diagnostic accuracy (area under the curve [AUC], sensitivity [sens], specificity [spec], positive predictive value [PPV], negative predictive value [NPV], and positive and negative likelihood ratios [LR+, LR-]) was evaluated at a clinically important 90% sensitivity level. Cut-off values for clinical use were calculated. RESULTS: In our population, hip ABD MVIS (AUC 0.8, sens 90.6%, spec 57.1%, PPV 70.7%, NPV 84.2%, LR+ 2.1, LR- 0.2, and cut-off value ≤ 1.1 N/kg) and hip ABD RFG (AUC 0.8, sens 90.6%, spec 46.4%, PPV 65.9%, NPV 81.3%, LR+ 1.7, LR- 0.2, and cut-off ≤ 8.47 N/kg/s) show diagnostic accuracy comparable to other fall risk assessments (SPPB and TUG) and a high net sensitivity when used in a test battery. CONCLUSION: Hip ABD MVIS or RFG shows good diagnostic accuracy to differentiate between older fallers and nonfallers compared to the chosen external criterion history of falls. The high net sensitivity when hip ABD MVIS or RFG is combined with currently used fall risk assessments shows promise in contributing value to a test battery and should be investigated further in longitudinal studies.