Home Print this page Email this page
Users Online: 658
Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
Year : 2017  |  Volume : 6  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 88-92

Predicting the probability of falls in geriatrics using traditional timed up and go test and dual-task constraint timed up and go test: An observational study

Department of Physiotherapy in Neuroscience, Dr. Vithalrao Vikhe Patil Foundation's College of Physiotherapy, Ahmednagar, Maharashtra, India

Correspondence Address:
Hitav Pankaj Someshwar
Someshwar,417/2 Vasant Niwas, Bhaudaji Road No. 10, Matunga, Mumbai - 400 019, Maharashtra
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/ijhas.IJHAS_175_16

Rights and Permissions

BACKGROUND: It is unclear how older adults modulate dual-task mobility under changing postural challenges. AIMS: The aim of this study is to compare traditional timed up and go test (TUG) and dual-task TUG for identifying geriatric population who are at risk of falling. METHODS: An observational study was performed at PDVVPF's Hospital, Ahmednagar. Sixty patients in the age group of 60–80 years who could walk independently and had a mini-mental state examination score >24 were selected after ethical clearance, inform consent was obtained from the patients, and the patient performed traditional TUG. The patient performed TUG with a motor constraint, i.e., typing from 1 to 9 on a calculator, and later with a cognitive constraint, i.e., answer simple questions. Time was recorded for all three tests and analyzed. RESULTS: For TUG (traditional), mean time was 20.96 s in fallers and 12.95 s in nonfallers; for TUG (manual), mean time was 25.12 s in fallers and 14.96 s in nonfallers to complete the test; and for TUG (cognitive), fallers group took 26.02 s and nonfallers group took 15.61 s to complete the test. The cutoff value to determine fallers for the traditional TUG is 15.95 s, for the motor TUG is 18.81 s, and for the cognitive TUG is 19.92 s, for determining geriatric population at a risk of falls. The traditional TUG had 90% sensitivity and 96.6% specificity, dual-task TUG motor 93.33% sensitivity and 93.33% specificity, and dual-task TUG cognitive 96.6% sensitivity and 93.33% specificity. CONCLUSION: TUG performed under cognitive constraint was a better indicator of falls.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded316    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal