51
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      An evaluation of the 30-s chair stand test in older adults: frailty detection based on kinematic parameters from a single inertial unit

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          A growing interest in frailty syndrome exists because it is regarded as a major predictor of co-morbidities and mortality in older populations. Nevertheless, frailty assessment has been controversial, particularly when identifying this syndrome in a community setting. Performance tests such as the 30-second chair stand test (30-s CST) are a cornerstone for detecting early declines in functional independence. Additionally, recent advances in body-fixed sensors have enhanced the sensors’ ability to automatically and accurately evaluate kinematic parameters related to a specific movement performance. The purpose of this study is to use this new technology to obtain kinematic parameters that can identify frailty in an aged population through the performance the 30-s CST.

          Methods

          Eighteen adults with a mean age of 54 years, as well as sixteen pre-frail and thirteen frail patients with mean ages of 78 and 85 years, respectively, performed the 30-s CST while threir trunk movements were measured by a sensor-unit at vertebra L3. Sit-stand-sit cycles were determined using both acceleration and orientation information to detect failed attempts. Movement-related phases (i.e. impulse, stand-up, and sit-down) were differentiated based on seat off and seat on events. Finally, the kinematic parameters of the impulse, stand-up and sit-down phases were obtained to identify potential differences across the three frailty groups.

          Results

          For the stand-up and sit-down phases, velocity peaks and “modified impulse” parameters clearly differentiated subjects with different frailty levels (p < 0.001). The trunk orientation range during the impulse phase was also able to classify a subject according to his frail syndrome (p < 0.001). Furthermore, these parameters derived from the inertial units (IUs) are sensitive enough to detect frailty differences not registered by the number of completed cycles which is the standard test outcome.

          Conclusions

          This study shows that IUs can enhance the information gained from tests currently used in clinical practice, such as the 30-s CST. Parameters such as velocity peaks, impulse, and orientation range are able to differentiate between adults and older populations with different frailty levels. This study indicates that early frailty detection could be possible in clinical environments, and the subsequent interventions to correct these disabilities could be prescribed before further degradation occurs.

          Related collections

          Most cited references30

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Frailty in older adults: evidence for a phenotype

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            A comparison of two approaches to measuring frailty in elderly people.

            Many definitions of frailty exist, but few have been directly compared. We compared the relationship between a definition of frailty based on a specific phenotype with one based on an index of deficit accumulation. The data come from all 2305 people 70 years old and older who composed the clinical examination cohort of the second wave of the Canadian Study of Health and Aging. We tested convergent validity by correlating the measures with each other and with other health status measures, and analyzed cumulative index distributions in relation to phenotype. To test criterion validity, we evaluated survival (institutionalization and all-cause mortality) by frailty index (FI) score, stratified by the phenotypic definitions as "robust," "pre-frail," and "frail." The measures correlated moderately well with each other (R=0.65) and with measures of function (phenotypic definition R=0.66; FI R=0.73) but less well with cognition (phenotypic definition R=-0.35; FI R=-0.58). The median FI scores increased from 0.12 for the robust to 0.30 for the pre-frail and 0.44 for the frail. Survival was also lower with increasing frailty, and institutionalization was more common, but within each phenotypic class, there were marked differences in outcomes based on the FI values-e.g., among robust people, the median 5-year survival for those with lower FI values was 85%, compared with 55% for those with higher FI values. The phenotypic definition of frailty, which offers ready clinical operationalization, discriminates broad levels of risk. The FI requires additional clinical translation, but allows the risk of adverse outcomes to be defined more precisely.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Frailty in relation to the accumulation of deficits.

              This review article summarizes how frailty can be considered in relation to deficit accumulation. Recalling that frailty is an age-associated, nonspecific vulnerability, we consider symptoms, signs, diseases, and disabilities as deficits, which are combined in a frailty index. An individual's frailty index score reflects the proportion of potential deficits present in that person, and indicates the likelihood that frailty is present. Although based on a simple count, the frailty index shows several interesting properties, including a characteristic rate of accumulation, a submaximal limit, and characteristic changes with age in its distribution. The frailty index, as a state variable, is able to quantitatively summarize vulnerability. Future studies include the application of network analyses and stochastic analytical techniques to the evaluation of the frailty index and the description of other state variables in relation to frailty.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                J Neuroeng Rehabil
                J Neuroeng Rehabil
                Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
                BioMed Central
                1743-0003
                2013
                1 August 2013
                : 10
                : 86
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Research, Studies and Sport Medicine Centre, Government of Navarra, Pamplona, Spain
                [2 ]Department of Mathematics, Public University of Navarra, Pamplona, Spain
                [3 ]Department of Health Sciences, Public University of Navarra, Pamplona, Spain
                Article
                1743-0003-10-86
                10.1186/1743-0003-10-86
                3735415
                24059755
                86aacaf8-cc8e-4eb4-b566-49f2c749f343
                Copyright ©2013 Millor et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 16 May 2013
                : 31 July 2013
                Categories
                Research

                Neurosciences
                inertial units,frailty syndrome,kinematic parameters,30-s chair stand test,signal analysis

                Comments

                Comment on this article