geriatric balance and fall prevention: evidence-based ...€¦ · 6 sensory: visual •depth...
TRANSCRIPT
1
GERIATRIC BALANCE AND FALL PREVENTION
Theresa A. Schmidt, DPT,MS,OCS,LMT,CEAS
www.educise.com
Allied Health Education
Copyright 2016 by Educise Resources Inc. All Rights reserved.1
Provider Disclaimer
• Allied Health Education and the presenter of this
webinar do not have any financial or other
associations with the manufacturers of any products
or suppliers of commercial services that may be
discussed or displayed in this presentation.
• There was no commercial support for this
presentation.
• The views expressed in this presentation are the
views and opinions of the presenter.
• Participants must use discretion when using the
information contained in this presentation.
Instructor: Theresa A. Schmidt, DPT,MS,OCS,LMT,CEAS,DD
Physical therapist specializing in orthopedic rehab, muscle energy,
joint mobs, myofascial release, craniosacral & visceral
manipulation, precision exercise, medical massage, bioenergy,
functional training and evidence-based integrative medicine.
Owner of Flex Physical Therapy and Educise Resources Inc, Northport, NY.
www.educise.com3
2
IntroductionWho hasn’t heard the commercial in which an
elderly person exclaims:
“I’ve fallen and I can’t get up!”
4
Falling is Part of Life
Unfortunately, it may also result in death or injury.
5
Adequate Balance
Many mechanisms in the body contribute to postural control in order to maintain
equilibrium and prevent or recover from falls
The ability to maintain the center of gravity over the base of support is the essence of balance
6
3
What is Balance?A state of equilibrium:
“Adequate postural control requires keeping the center of gravity over at the base of support during both static and dynamic situations. The body must be able to respond to translations of the center of gravity voluntarily imposed, e.g., intentional movement, and in voluntarily or unexpectedly opposed, e.g., slip, trip.”
(Guccione, AA, p. 282)7
8
Postural Reflexes• To maintain equilibrium, the center of gravity is
stabilized to allow for postural changes and movement, either in response to (unexpected) or in anticipation of (expected) positional changes: a displacement of the C of G (center of gravity)
• Automatic postural responses attempt to make corrections when the C of G is perturbed away from the BOS (base of support)
(Guccioine, p. 283)
9
4
Balance Physiology: Three Systems
• Sensory System: proprioceptors
detect body’s relative position in space and respond accordingly to changes in position and trajectory
• Central Processing System: brain
determines response to perturbation
• Effector System: muscles
Perform the movements to effect a response(Guccione, p. 282)
10
Sensory System
• Somatosensory
• Vestibular
• Visual
• All three contribute input to central processing of positional information for response
11
Sensory: Somatosensory
• Proprioceptors
– in joints, muscles, tendons
– detect changes in length and velocity of motions
Strength and flexibility are reduced in aging
Perception of position may be altered by peripheral neuropathy, injury, biomechanical faults or disease
12
5
Sensory: Vestibular
Vestibular Labyrinth: inner ear senses head motion and position from two sources:
- Semicircular canals: 3 fluid-filled structures sense direction and velocity of rotary motion as fluid moves
-Otoliths: utricle and saccule-
detect linear acceleration (straight line motion),
as head moves, otoconia (calcium stones) move over the hairs lining the organ
(From: http://www.betterbalance fall prevention.com/images/ResearchArticle. Accessed 2/21/13)
13
Vestibular Disorders
• Symptoms: dizziness, lightheadness, disorientation, sense of spinning (vertigo), floating, blurry vision, nausea, feel like falling
• Types:
– Peripheral vestibular- labyrinth problem
– Central vestibular-CNS disorder
– Systemic- in the body
– Cardiovascular- circulatory disorder(From: http://www.betterbalance fall prevention.com/images/ResearchArticle. Accessed
2/21/13)
14
Vestibular Diagnoses• BPPV: benign paroxysmal positional vertigo-
specific head motions cause sudden, temporary vertigo, no known cause
• Menieres disease- fluid balance disorder in inner ear with tinnitus, loss of hearing, vertigo, full feeling in the ear, no known cause
• Perilymph fistula- fluid leakage from inner to middle ear, may be due to injury
• Vestibular neuritis- infection of vestibular nerve
• Labyrinthitis- inner ear infection(From: http://www.betterbalance fall prevention.com/images/ResearchArticle. Accessed 2/21/13)
15
6
Sensory: Visual
• Depth perception- 3-D distance perception
• Visual acuity- sharpness of shapes
• Contrast sensitivity- detect difference in patterns and shading
-Loss in aging correlates with fall risk in elderly (Lord,
(SR, Clark, RD, Webster, pp. 175-181)
• Peripheral vision- lateral vision while looking forward
(Guccione, pp. 282-283)
16
Central Processing• Postural response is preprogrammed by CNS
• “the CNS receives sensory information provided by the visual, vestibular, and somatosensorysystems;
• processes it in the context of previously learned responses; and
• executes a corrective automatic postural response that is guided by or expressed through the mechanical structure in which it sits.”(Guccione, p. 283)
17
Nashner’s Postural Response Model
Normal postural control reaction to outside perturbations uses 3 mechanisms:
• Ankle Strategy• Hip Strategy• Stepping Strategy
• C of G = center of gravity• BOS= base of support
(Guccione, p. 283) 18
7
Ankle Strategy• Works in response to minimal displacement of
C of G over BOS in ant/post directions
• A corrective motion occurs primarily about the ankle joint, with the upper body more rigid
• Normal adult latency: 100-120 msecs.
• Normal sequence: LE muscles recruited from distal to proximal
• (i.e. tibialis anterior> quads; or gastroc>hams activation sequence) (Guccione, p. 283)
19
Hip Strategy
• Acts in response to greater displacement of
in A/P directions
• Corrective motion occurs primarily about the hip joint, with the upper body more rigid
• Normal adult latency: 100-120 msecs.
• Normal sequence: LE muscles recruited from proximal to distal
• (i.e. glutes>hams>gastrocs) (Guccione, p. 283)
20
Stepping Strategy
• In response to perturbation taking the C of G beyond the BOS
• Response involves patient
stumbling or stepping
to restore balance
21
8
Other Balance Response Strategies• Taking extra lateral steps
• Excess trunk and arm motions, grabbing a handrail or swinging arms
• Patterns of response and response timing varies between individuals
• In aging adults, there is a higher incidence of antagonist muscle co-contraction and proximal to distal activation than in normal adults
(Guccione, p. 284)
22
Timing Delays Increase Fall Risks• “Studenski and colleagues reported evidence of
delayed latency in older fallers when compared with age-matched nonfallers.
• Latencies are not only delayed in the healthy older adult but are even further delayed in the older person with a history of unexplained falls.” (Guccione, p. 284)
• It’s interesting how research portrays information.
23
Effectors: Musculoskeletal• Posture- malalignment shifts weight
• Range of Motion- poor flexibility contributes to lack of corrective strategies to restore balance (LE, cervical, trunk)
• Strength/ power- inadequate strength and slow response times contribute to ineffectiveness in returning to prior position (dynamometer: hip/knee/ankle)
• Endurance- Fatigue contributes to inability to remain in equilibrium over time (use 6 min. walk test: distance covered in 6 minutes)
24
9
25
AGING AND BALANCE
26
The Problem of FallingMost falls are not very dramatic; as a matter of
fact, everyone falls at some point in life.
Unfortunately, the consequences of falling are considerably worse as one ages.
27
10
EpidemiologyIncidence, Morbidity and Mortality
• One-third of adults over 65 fall annually
• Falls are the most common cause of hospital admission and injury death in adults over 65.
• Falls cause the most fractures in adults over 65, 95% of hip fractures are due to falls
• Women who fall have more than double the risk of fracture than men
(From: http://www.cdc.gov/homeandrecreationalsafety/falls/adultfalls.html. Accessed 2/25/12.)28
Nursing Home Residents Fall Stats• “nursing home residents account for about 20%
of deaths from falls” in adults over 65”
• Annually there are 100-200 falls reported in 100-bed nursing homes
• 50 to 75% of residents fall annually
• Residents experience about 2.6 falls each year.
(from: http://www.cdc.gov/HomeandRecreationalSafety/Falls/nursing.html. Accessed 2/25/12)
29
Risk Factors in Aging • Musculoskeletal:
-joint and myofascial stiffness
-muscle weakness
-postural asymmetry
“Muscle weakness and walking or gait problems are the most common causes of falls among nursing home residents.”
(From:http://www.cdc.gov/HomeandRecreationalSafety/Falls/nursing.html. Accessed 2/25/13)
30
11
Risk Factors in Aging
• Altered vestibular sensitivity
• Motor planning deficits
• Reduced perceptual cues: low or poor vision or attending to incorrect environmental cues (depth perception, focus, attention)
• Delayed or altered recruitment patterns
31
Risk Factors in Aging
• Poor coordination memory
• Cognitive and memory impairment
• Dementia
• Psychological confusion
• Fear: “ptophobia”= fear of falling (Lewis, p. 108)
32
Risk Factors in Aging• Cardiovascular: dizziness from
– orthostatic hypotension
– vertebral artery compromise
*If falling is frequent, consider cardiovascular or neuromuscular compromise (Lewis, p. 110)
• Peripheral neuropathy: loss of sensation, inability to feel changes in surfaces and joint motions, proprioceptive loss(Lewis, p. 107)
33
12
Risk Factors in AgingPolypharmacy- taking more than 4 drugs
34
Medication Hazards
• “Medications can increase the risk of falls and fall-related injuries. Drugs that affect the central nervous system, such as sedatives and anti-anxiety drugs, are of particular concern.
• Fall risk is significantly elevated during the three days following any change in these types of medications.”
(From: http://www.cdc.gov/HomeandRecreationalSafety/Falls/nursing.html. Accessed 2/25/13)35
Drugs in the Elderly• Drug metabolism and distribution decrease
with age, liver and kidneys are less efficient,
• Drugs may stay in their system longer
• No one knows the interactions of multiple drugs in the body, most studies are of one or few drug combinations
36
13
Environmental Risk Factors• Loose rugs, slippery or wet floors
• Uneven surfaces
• Improper footwear, walking in socks
• Dim lighting, poor contrast
• Obstacles
(From: http://www.cdc.gov/HomeandRecreationalSafety/Falls/nursing.html. Accessed 2/25/13)
37
Environmental Risk Factors
• Poor fitting of ambulation aids/wheelchairs
• Improper bed or toilet height
• Lack of assistive aids (grab bars)
38
Medical Risk Factors
• Cardiovascular: hypoxemia, dizziness,
Low blood volume
• Electrolyte imbalances
• Neuromuscular disease: MS, Parkinson’s
• CNS injury or disease, stroke, brain tumors,
• Foot problems
39
14
Personal Implications of Falling
• Loss of independence
• Limited ADLs
• Loss of confidence
• Limited social interaction
• Fear of additional falls
(Guccione. p. 280)
40
BREAK
41
Balance Examination Tools
42
15
Best Places To Find Exams
https://www.cdc.gov/steadi/
http://geriatrictoolkit.missouri.edu/
WWW.REHABMEASURES.ORG
43
Written Tools
Questionnaires
44
Falls Efficacy Scale (FES)Psychological Aspects of Balance
• “On a scale from 1 to 10,
• with 1 being very confident and
• 10 not being confident at all, how confident are you that you do the following activities without falling?...
• A score of greater than 70 indicates that the person has a fear of falling” and avoids activities
(Falls Efficacy Scale, in Lewis, p. 236.) (Tinetti, Richman and Powell 1980)
45
16
Falls Efficacy Scale Activities Score 1-101. “Take a bath or shower2. Reach in to cabinets or closets3. Walk around the house4. Prepare meals not requiring carrying heavy or hot
objects5. Get in or out of bed6. Answer the door or telephone7. Get in or out of a chair8. Getting dressed and undressed9. Personal grooming (i.e. washing your face)10. Getting on and off the toilet• Score 1 very confident 10 not confident at all• Total Score” (Falls Efficacy Scale, in Lewis, p. 236)
46
ABC: Activities Specific Balance Confidence Scale
• Informs if client has confidence in ability to do ADLs without falling
• 16 item questionnaire, 0-100% confidence
• reliability .81-.98
• “How confident are you that you will not lose your balance or become unsteady when you…”
• GET THE ABC at:
• www.pro-pt.net/files/pdf/Outcome%20Measures/
ABC_Scale-Final.pdf
47
ABC SCALE• Includes ADLs:
• walk around house, up/down stairs, pick up shoe, reach a shelf, stand on toes or chair to reach,
• sweep floor, walk to driveway, enter/exit car,
• walk across shopping lot, up/down ramp, walk crowded mall, bumped by others,
• use escalator, use escalator holding items without handrail,
• walk on ice
48
17
Objective Tools
49
Posture Evaluation• Normal static standing alignment :
• lateral view: plumbline goes through:
• middle ear, acromion,
• greater trochanter, posterior patella,
• anterior lateral malleolus.
• Aging postural changes: forward head, thoracic kyphosis, protracted shoulders, lumbar lordosis(or flattening), and increased hip and knee flexion. (Lewis, p. 65)
50
POSTURE Affects Balance
51
18
Positioning Exams
52
Position Screening: Blood Pressure
• Ask patient to move from lying to sitting, sitting to standing
• Ask if he becomes dizzy during positional changes, document it
• Examiner may check blood pressure in various positions and the change in BP to assess orthostatic hypotension
• Is it vestibular or orthostatic?
53
Assessing Orthostatic Blood Pressure
• To test, ask the client to lie down 5 mins. While you measure BP
• Ask client to stand, measure BP again after 1 minute and after 3 minutes
• If Systolic BP drops >/= 20mmHg, or
• If diastolic BP drops >/= 10 mmHg, or
• Client is dizzy or lightheaded
• Positive for orthostatic hypotension
54
19
Is it Vertebral Artery Syndrome?
• With patient supine, examiner passively moves his neck into rotation with extension
• Positive if nystagmus, unilateral pupillary dilation or constriction, dizziness, nausea or vomiting occurs: refer to Physician
55
Is it Vestibular?
56
• There are special tests for vestibular involvement which are beyond the scope of this course.
• Caloric testing, Dix-Hallpike maneuver, and other tests can help rule out or rule in vestibular nerve impairment
STANDING, SITTING AND WALKING BALANCE TESTS
57
20
ROMBERG TEST• Client stands with feet parallel, close together
• Client remains in place with eyes open
• Test again with eyes closed 30 secs.
• assess body sway
• Abnormal if loss of balance, eyes open or
• Client steps to catch self: a positive test
• Romberg/Tandem Romberg
58
ROMBERG VIDEO
59
Tandem Romberg
• Tandem or sharpened Romberg: stand heel to toe with arms folded on chest for 60 secs., eyes closed
• Sharpened Romberg Norms: ages 60-69: 56 sec, 70-74: 48 sec., 75-79: 39 sec, 80-86: 45 sec.
• 60-69= 56, 70-74=48,
• 75-79=39, 80-86= 45
• (Briggs et al, 1989)
60
21
TANDEM ROMBERG VIDEO
61
Single Leg Stance Test: Eyes Open/ Closed
• AKA: Unilateral leg stance test (SLST)
Ask client to cross arms and
lift favored leg
• Shoes on, average of 3 trials
• Result: High risk of falls/injury if below 5 seconds
• Disqualify if elevated foot hits ground, arms uncross, stance leg moves, or trunk tilts >45 degrees
• Repeat with eyes closed(Lewis, p. 113)
62
MEANS FOR ONE-LEGGED STANCE TEST (from Bohannan, et al 1984)
AGE 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79
OPEN eyes
30.0 30.0 29.7 29.4 22.5 14.2
CLOSEDeyes
28.8 27.8 24.2 21.0 10.2 4.3
63
22
MEANS FOR TIMED UNIPEDAL STANCE TEST, right foot (El-Kashlan, 1998)
AGE 20-49Yrs.
50-59 60-69 70-79
OPEN eyes
28.8Sec.
24.2 27.1 18.2
CLOSEDeyes
20.7Sec.
6.1 2.0 1.0
64
SINGLE LEG STANCE TEST VIDEO eyes open
65
SINGLE LEG STANCE TEST VIDEOeyes closed
66
23
Functional Reach Test (FRT) Standing
• Patient standing, reaches forward as far as possible with hands along a tape measure on the wall, shoulder flexed 90, closed fist, feet on floor
• Measure excursion of reach without falling
• “Duncan and colleagues have shown that frail persons with reaches less than 6 inches have 4 times the likelihood of falling than persons with a reach greater that 10 inches”.
(Guccione, p. 288)
•May be done in standing or sitting, use average of the last 2 scores of 3 trials
67
MEANS FOR FUNCTIONAL REACH TEST (from Isles, et al, p. 1370, 2004)
AGE 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79
Isles Mean in cm.
42.71cm
41.01cm
40.37cm
38.08cm
36.85cm
34.13cm
OthersDuncanBrauer
37.08 35.05 35.05 35.0529.6
26.6729.6
68
FUNCTIONAL REACH TEST VIDEO standing
69
24
Modified FRT Sitting
• Patient sitting with hips, knees and ankles at 90, sitting against the chairback, feet on floor
• Initial reach with shoulder at 90 forward
• Do 1 trial with uninvolved side near wall, reaching forward, , one with sitting with back to the wall, leaning R, and one with sitting back to the wall leaning L
• 3 trials are used, scores average of last 2 trials
70
Sitting FRT Means (Thompson and Medley, 2007)
AGEYrs.
21-39 40-59 65-93
Lateral reach in sitting, cm.
44.9 42.3 32.9
Forward reach in sitting, cm.
29.5 26.7 20.3
71
FUNCTIONAL REACH TEST VIDEO sitting
72
25
5 TIMES SIT TO STAND TEST
• Measures functional limb strength
• Patient sits with arms across chest in standard chair of 43 cm height, 47.5 cm depth
• Rises sit to stand as quickly as possible 5 times
• Normal healthy adults can do in 8.2 seconds
73
FTSST Results (#seconds for 5 stands)
Whitney, 2005 Whitney, 2005
Bohannon, 2006
Bohannon, 2006
Young controls23-57 yrs.
8.2 11.4 60-69 yrs
Young with balance issues 14-59 yrs
15.3 12.6 70-79
Older control63-84 yrs
13.4 12.7 80-89
Older with balance issues 61-90 yrs
16.4
74
5 TIMES SIT TO STAND TEST VIDEO
75
26
Five Times Sit to Stand Test (FTSST)
Whitney et al studied the FTSST in n=81 without balance issues and n=93 with balance problems
• FTSST: subject stands up from a 43 cm. chair 5X rapidly
• Compared to DGI and ABC scales
• Each test identified a % of persons with balance deficits:
FTSST: 65%, ABC 80%, DGI 78%(Whitney, SL, Wrisley, DM, Marchetti, GF, Gee, MA, Redfern, MS, and Furman, JM, Clinical
Measurement of Sit-to-Stand Performance in people with Balance disorders: Validity of Data for the Five-times-Sit-To- Stand Test. Phys Ther 2005;85(10):1034-1035)
76
STEP TEST
• Measure the times a person can step with one foot completely on and off a 7.5cm block quickly in 15 seconds
77
MEANS FOR STEP TEST (# in 15 seconds)(from Isles, et al, p. 1370, 2004)
AGE 20-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60-69 70-79
Isles: mean #of steps
20.72 20.17 18.77 17.13 15.59 13.73
Others:HillBrauer
17.671615.6
17.671615.6
78
27
WHAT ABOUT BEDRIDDEN PATIENTS?
Test using the Function in Sitting Test
79
FUNCTION IN SITTING TEST- FIST• 14 functional sitting items used for patients to
be used bedside under 10 minutes
• Need stopwatch and tape measure, pen, stool and chair
• Position: Patient sitting on edge of bed, hands in lap, neutral hip ab/ad/rot. Hips flexed 90, half femur on bed, feet flat on floor or stool
• Explain test to patient, sitting with best posture and balance, reaching and scooting, withstanding some pushes, without using hands
80
FIST SCORING
• 0 = Dependent- requires complete physical assist to perform, dependent
• 1 = Needs physical assistance, document amount of assist required:
min A (25% or less effort by therapist)
mod A (26-74% effort by therapist)
max A (75% or more effort by therapist)
81
28
FIST SCORING• 2 = Upper extremity support = Must use 1 or
both arms to assist self to perform or for balance
• 3 = Verbal cues, increased time = normal performance but needs more time or cueing to complete
• 4 = Independent = normal speed and safety
(Download at: www.samuelmerritt.edu/fist) used with permission.
82
FIST FUNCTION IN SITTING TEST• Get test online at: (From: http://
www.samuelmerritt.edu/fist/documentation
• “Anterior nudge: superior sternum
• Posterior nudge: between scapular spines
• Lateral nudge: to dominant side at acromion
• Static sitting: 30 seconds
• Sitting, shake ‘no’: left and right
• Sitting, eyes closed: 30 seconds”83
FIST CONTINUED
• “Sitting lift foot: dominant side, lift foot 1 inch twice’
• Pick up object from behind: object at midline, hands breadth posterior
• Forward Reach: use dominant arm, must complete full motion
• Lateral reach: use dominant arm, clear opposite ischial tuberosity”
• (From: http:// www.samuelmerritt.edu/fist/documentation. (Accessed 12/26/13)
84
29
FIST CONTINUED
• “Pick up object from floor: from between feet• Posterior scooting: move backwards 2 inches• Anterior scooting: move forward 2 inches• Lateral scooting: move to dominant side 2
inches”
TOTAL the score ____/56. Add notes or comments.
MDC= 5.63 for acute stroke (www.rehabmeasures.org)
(From: http:// www.samuelmerritt.edu/fist/documentation. (Accessed 12/26/13) with permission. Download templates and web-based training at the website for your clinic.
85
Gait Exam Tests
86
TIMED Up and Go Test (TUG)
• The examiner times how long it takes for patient to
• sit in a chair,
• rise,
• stand still,
• walk towards a wall,
• turn around
• before touching the wall,
• return to the chair and sit down. 87
30
TIMED UP AND GO MEANS FOR COMMUNITY ELDERLY (from Isles et al, p.1370)
AGE RANGE yrs. TIMED GET UP AND GO (secs)
20-29 5.3
30-39 5.4
40-49 6.2
50-59 6.4
60-69 7.2 (8,8.4,13)
70-79 8.5 (8.5,8,8.4)88
TIMED UP AND GO VIDEO
89
Interpreting TUG Test
• If >12 secs, they have high falls risk (https://www.cdc.gov/injury/STEADI)
• If >30 secs, they may require assistive device, have low BBS score and are unable to walk in community due to slowness
(https://www.atrainceu.com/course-module/1473452-69)
90
31
BERG BALANCE SCALE
• The next 2 slides give an overview of the Berg Balance Scale,
• The next 14 slides specify the 14 components of the actual examination.
(All of the next 14 slides are adapted from: Berg K., in Lewis, p. 233)
•Berg is the test most often used by PTs to document balance exam results
91
Equipment for BBS
• Chair with armrests
• Stopwatch
• Tape measure
• Step stool
• Item to lift from floor
92
BERG BALANCE VIDEO 1
93
32
BERG BALANCE VIDEO 2
94
Berg Balance Scale“1. Sitting to standing• Instruction: Please stand up. Try not to use your
hands for support.• Grading: Please mark the lowest category that
applies.• (4) Able to stand, no hands and stabilize
independently• (3) Able to stand independently using hands• (2) Able to stand using hands after several tries• (1)Needs minimal aide to stand or to stabilize• (0)Needs moderate or maximal assist to stand”(Lewis, p. 233)
95
Berg Balance Scale“2. Standing Unsupported
Instruction: Stand for two minutes without holding.
Grading: Please mark the lowest category that applies.
(4) Able to stand safely for 2 minutes
(3) Able to stand 2 minutes with supervision
(2)Able to stand 30 seconds unsupported
(1)Needs several tries to stand 30 seconds unsupported
(0)Unable to stand 30 seconds unassisted” (Lewis, p. 233)
96
33
Berg Balance Scale“IF SUBJECT IS ABLE TO STAND 2 MINUTES UNSUPPORTED, SCORE
FULL MARKS FOR SITTING UNSUPPORTED. PROCEED TO ITEM #4.
3. Sitting with back unsupported but feet supported on floor or on a stool
Instruction: Sit with arms folded for two minutes.Grading: Please mark the lowest category that applies.(4)Able to sit safely and securely 2 minutes(3) Able to sit 2 minutes under supervision(2) Able to sit 30 seconds(1)Able to sit 10 seconds(0)Unable to sit without support 10 seconds” (Lewis, p. 233)
97
Berg Balance Scale“4. Standing to sitting
Instruction: Please sit down.
Grading: Please mark the lowest category that applies.
(4) Sits safely without use of hands
(3) Controls descent by using hands
(2)Uses back of legs against chair to control descent
(1)Sits independently but has uncontrolled descent
(0)Needs assistance to sit” (Lewis, p. 233)
98
Berg Balance Scale“5. TransfersInstruction: Please move from this chair (chair with arm
rests) to this chair (chair without arm rests) and back again. (Both directions)
Grading: Please mark the lowest category that applies.
(4) Able to transfer safely without use of hands
(3) Able to transfer safely with definite need of hands
(2) Able to transfer with verbal cueing and/or supervision
(1)Needs one person to assist
(0)Needs two people to assist or supervise to be safe”(Lewis, p. 233)
99
34
Berg Balance Scale
“6. Standing unsupported with eyes closedInstruction: close your eyes and stand still for 10
sec.Grading: Please mark the lowest category that
applies.(4) Able to stand 10 seconds safely(3) Able to stand 10 seconds with supervision(2) Able to stand 3 seconds(1)Unable to keep eyes closed 3 seconds but stays
steady(0)Needs help to keep from falling” (Lewis, p. 233)
100
Berg Balance Scale“7. Standing unsupported with feet together.Instruction: Place your feet together and stand without
holding onto any external support.Grading: Please mark the lowest category that applies.
(4) Able to place feet together independently and stand 1 minute safely(3) Able to place feet together independently and for 1 minute with supervision(2) Able to place feet together independently but unable to hold for 30 seconds(1) Needs help to attain position but able to stand 15 seconds feet together(0)Needs help to attain position and unable to hold for 15 seconds” (Lewis, p. 233) 101
Berg Balance Scale“THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ARE TO BE PERFORMED WHILE STANDING
UNSUPPORTED8. Reaching forward with outstretched armInstruction: Lift arm to 90 degrees. Stretch out your fingers and
reach forward as far as you can. Examiner places a ruler at end of fingertips when arm is at 90 degrees. Fingers should not touch the ruler while reaching forward. The recorded measure is the distance forward that the fingers reach while the subject is in the most forward lean position.
Grading: Please mark the lowest category that applies.(4) Can reach forward confidently>10 inches(3) Can reach forward>5 inches safely(2) Can reach forward>2 inches safely(1)Reaches forward but needs supervision(0)Needs help to keep from falling” (Lewis, p. 233)
102
35
Berg Balance Scale“9. Pick up object from the floorInstruction: Pick up the shoe/slipper that is placed in
front of your feet.Grading: Please mark the lowest category that applies.
(4) Able to pick up slipper safely and easily(3) Able to pick up slipper but need supervision(2)Unable to pick up but reaches 1-2 inches from slipper and keeps balance indep.(1)Unable to pick up and needs supervision while trying
(0)Unable to try; needs assist to keep from falling”(Lewis, p. 233)
103
Berg Balance Scale“10. Turning to look behind/over left and right
shoulders.
Instruction: Turn to look behind you over/toward left shoulder. Repeat to the right.
Grading: Please mark the lowest category that applies.(4) Looks behind from both sides and weight shifts well(3) Looks behind one side only; other side shows less weight shift(2) Turns sideways only but maintains balance(1)Needs supervision when turning(0)Needs assist to keep from falling” (Lewis, p. 233)
104
Berg Balance Scale“11. Turn 360 degrees
Instruction: Turn completely around in a full circle. Pause. Then turn a full circle in the other direction.
Grading: Please mark the lowest category that applies.
(4) Able to turn 360 safely in <4 sec each side
(3) Able to turn 360 safely one side only in <4 sec
(2) Able to turn 360 safely but slowly
(1) Needs close supervision or verbal cueing
(0)Needs assistance while turning” (Lewis, p. 233)
105
36
Berg Balance Scale“DYNAMIC WEIGHT SHIFTING WHILE STANDING UNSUPPORTED
12. Stool touch Instruction: Place each foot alternately on the stool. Continue until each foot has touched the stool four times for a total of eight times.
Grading: Please mark the lowest category that applies.
(4) Able to stand independently and safely and complete 8 step in 20 seconds
(3) Able to stand independently and complete 8 steps >20 seconds
(2) Able to complete 4 steps without aid with supervision
(1)Able to complete>2 steps, needs minimal assist
(0)Needs assistance to keep from falling/unable to try”
(Lewis, p. 233) 106
Berg Balance Scale“13. Standing unsupported, one foot in front. Instruction:
(Demonstrate to subject) Place one foot directly in front of the other. If you feel that you cannot place your foot directly in front, try to step far enough ahead that the heel of your forward foot is ahead of the toes of the other foot. (To score 3 points, the length of the step should exceed the length of the other foot and the width of the stance should approximate the subject’s normal stride width.)
Grading: Please mark the lowest category that applies.(4) Able to place foot tandem independently and hold 30 seconds(3) Able to place foot ahead of other independently and hold 30 seconds(2) Able to take small step independently and hold 30 seconds(1)Needs help to step but can hold 15 seconds(0)Loses balance while stepping or standing” (Lewis, p. 233) 107
Berg Balance Scale“14. Standing on one legInstruction: Stand on one leg as long as you can without
holding onto external support.Grading: Please mark the lowest category that applies.
(4) Able to lift leg independently and hold >10 seconds(3) Able to lift leg independently and hold 5-10 seconds(2) Able to lift leg independently and hold up to 3 seconds(1)Tries to lift leg; unable to hold 3 sec but remains standing independently(0)Unable to try or needs assist to prevent fall
TOTAL SCORE ___________/_____56__”
(Lewis, p. 233)
108
37
Interpreting Berg Balance Scale
MDC: minimal detectable change: tells us if significant change has really occurred
If initial BBS score is:
0-24, MDC = 5
25-34, MDC = 7
35-44, MDC = 5
45-56, MDC = 4
(Download Berg Scale: www.rehabmeasures.org)
109
Interpreting Berg Balance Scale
• Specificity= 90% predicts one will not fall
• Sensitivity= 64% predicts people who fall
• People must have a score of at least 45/56 for independent ambulation in safety (Riddle and Stratford, 1999)
• Uses minimal equipment in a small clinic space
• Ceiling effect for higher functioning people
• NO ambulation items on the test
• Most common functional exam post-stroke
110
Low Berg Score Predicts Falls
Shumway-Cook and Woollacott (1997, 2012) reported as Berg scores declined,
risk of falls increased, with a change of 1 pt.
• BBS 56-54 increased falls risk of 3-4%
• BBS 54-46 increased falls risk of 6-8%
• BBS scores <36, 100% increased falls risk
(From https://www.atrainceu.com/course-module/1473452-69)
111
38
Statistics for BBS Studies: adults in community(From: http://www.rehabmeasures.org/Lists/RehabMeasures/DispForm.aspx?ID=888
GENDER AGE IN YEARS MEAN SCORE
MALE 60-69 55
FEMALE 60-69 55
MALE 70-79 54
FEMALE 70-79 53
MALE 80-89 53
FEMALE 80-89 50
112
BBS MINIMAL DETECTABLE CHANGE
ELDERLY: Donohue study:
Initial Score and MDC:
• 0-24 = 4.6
• 25-34 = 6.3
• 35-44 = 4.9
• 45-56 = 3.3(Donohue, et al, 2009,
(From: http://www.rehabmeasures.org/Lists/RehabMeasures/DispForm.aspx?ID=888
• Romero, et al, 2011: reported MDC = 6.5113
TINETTI BALANCE TOOLPerformance Oriented Assessment of
Balance & Gait Scale
• 7 gait (12 points) and
• 9 balance tests (16 pts)
Scored from 0-2:
• 0 = greatest impairment
• 2= independent
114
39
Tinetti Assessment Tool: GaitExaminer observes gait at a normal and a rapid pace;
rated from 0-1.
• Gait initiation
• Step height and length- swing of each foot
-symmetry of steps
-continuity- stops or continues walking
• Path deviation- marked or straight
• Trunk motion- swaying, flexion
• Walking stance- heel distance between heels, BOS( Tinetti, ME, in Lewis, p. 229, Tinetti, ME, pp. 42-49) 115
Tinetti POMA modified (Tinetti, 1986)
1. Sitting balance
0= leans, slides
1= safe, steady
2. Rise from chair
0= unable without assist
1= able using hands
2= independent, not using hands
116
Tinetti POMA: modified for lab (Tinetti, 1986)
3. Attempt to rise
0= unable
1=rises with > one try
2= rises on first try
4. Immediate standing balance
0= moves feet, not steady
1= uses support to steady self
2= Independent without aids
117
40
Tinetti POMA: modified for lab (Tinetti, 1986)
5. Balance standing
0= unsteady
1= wide base, over 4 “, gait aid
2= independent without support
6. Sternal nudge
0= starts falling
1= grabs, catches self, staggers
2= independent, steady
118
Tinetti POMA: modified for lab (Tinetti, 1986)
7. Stand with eyes closed
0= not steady
1= steady
8. Turn around in a circle
0= discontinuous steps
1= continuous
0= grabs, unsteady, swaggering
1= independent, steady
119
Tinetti POMA: modified for lab (Tinetti, 1986)
9. Stand to sitting down
0= not safe
1= not smooth, uses hands
2= safe, independent
10-Starts walk
0=hesitant or 1 try, 1= not hesitant
120
41
Tinetti POMA: modified for lab (Tinetti, 1986)
11- Step length and height
0= R swing leg fails to pass
1= R swing passes L
0= R fails to clear floor
1= R clears floor
Repeat for L side and include score of 0 or 1 for each for a total of 4 possible points
121
Tinetti POMA: modified for lab (Tinetti, 1986)
12. Foot Clearance
0= foot drop
1= L foot clears floor
1= R foot clears floor
122
Tinetti POMA modified for lab
13- Symmetry of steps
0= unequal step lengrth
1= equal step length
14- Continuity of steps
0= discontinuous
1= continuous
123
42
Tinetti POMA modified for lab
15- Ambulate 10 ft. path
0= significant deviation from straight
1= uses gait device or has min/mod deviation
2= ambulates straight path
16- Trunk motion 0= sways or uses gait aid
1= spreads arms, flexes knees or trunk
2= No aid, sway or flexion of knees, trunk
124
Tinetti POMA: modified for lab (Tinetti, 1986)
Walking heels spaced apart
0=Heels apart (base of support wide)
1= Heels almost touching while walking
(base of support normal, 2-4” wide)
125
Tinetti Score Predicts Falls Risk
• Normal = 28
• Low risk = 25-27
• High risk = 20-23
• Very high risk = <20
Download at www.rehabmeasures.org(Tinetti, 1986)
126
43
Dynamic Gait Index (DGI)
• Assesses changes in gait with task performance
• Scores impairments from 0-3 points per task
• Predicts falls likelihood increases 2.58 times for scores under 19 points (Whitney, 2000)
• Romero reported MDC for DGI in adults >65 yrs = 2.9 points (Romero, 2011)
127
Dynamic Gait Index (DGI)• Examiner observes gait: scores 8 gait activities from
0-3 points each:
• 0 = severe impairment, 1= moderate impairment 2=mild, 3 =normal– on level surface,
– with speed changes,
– during horizontal head rotation,
– with vertical head turns,
– pivot turn,
– stepping over shoe box obstacle,
– stepping around 2 cones each 6’ apart, and
– stair climbing up/down 128
Dynamic Gait IndexAccess tool download at:
www.rehabmeasures.org
Need: 20 ft. walkway, 15” wide, shoebox, 2 cones, stairs
Score of < or = 19/24: predicts falls in elders
Score of >22/24: may walk safely in community
129
44
DYNAMIC GAIT INDEX VIDEO
130
Dynamic Gait Index (DGI) ReliabilityMarchetti et al performed 3 trials of the DGI in 47
subjects 24-90 yrs. Divided into group 1: normal control and group 2: people with balance or vestibular disorders.
They compared differences in gait parameters from the DGI for both groups.
Results: The DGI demonstrated differences between involved and control groups for dynamic gait parameters.
The study showed fair to excellent reliability between trials.
(Marchetti, GF, et al., pp. 640-651) 131
DGI statistics• Cutoff point = 19/24 predicts elderly falls risk
• MCID= minimally clinically important difference for DGI= 1.9 in community dwelling elders
• MDC:
– Comm. dwelling elders= 2.9
– MS = 4.19-5.54
– Chronic stroke = 4
– Parkinsons = 2.9
– Vestibular = 3.2(From: www.rehabmeasures.org, accessed 2/7/14)
132
45
Normative Values for DGI (Vereech et al)
AGE AVERAGE DGI SCORE
30-49 24
50-69 23.9
70-79 23.2
80-89 22
133
134
BESTest Balance Evaluation Systems Test
Fay Horak designed BESTest to evaluate 6 balance systems for a %-age score of 108 total points:
• Biomechanical constraints
• Stability Limits/ verticality
• Postural Responses, reactive
• Sensory Orientation
• Transitions/Anticipatory Postural Adjustments
• Gait stability
• Cognitive effects
(Horak, p. 2, http://www.bestest.us. Accessed Aug. 27, 2013)
135
46
BESTest
The BESTest is a copyright protected
• To learn the BESTest, visit Dr. Horak’swebsite at
http://www.ohsu.edu/horak
Test copies available at:
• FullBESTest.pdf
• MiniBEST.pdf (revised 3/08/13)
136
BESTest Tools Needed
• Tape measure, stopwatch
• Medium density Foam block 2x2ft by 4” high
• 2 shoe boxes
• Incline ramp at 10 degrees, min. 2x2 ft.
• 6 inch stair step (15cm)
• 5 pound free weight (2.5kg)
• Masking tape
• Armchair and floor marked with tape 3m away
(Horak, p. 1 BESTest)
137
BREAK
138
47
Mini-BESTest: 14 components
Anticipatory
1. SIT TO STAND arms crossed
2. RISE TO TOES feet apart, hands on hips, hold 3 s.
3. STAND ON ONE LEG hands on hips, lift leg back
139
Mini-BESTestReactive Postural Control:
stand, feet apart, arms at sides, leans on examiner’s hands and ex. releases to assess how they attempt to regain balance
4. COMPENSATORY STEPPING CORRECTION-FORWARD, lean fwd on examiner’s hands
5. COMPENSATORY STEPPING CORRECTION-BACKWARD, lean bkwd against examiner’s hands
6. COMPENSATORY STEPPING CORRECTION-LATERAL, lean laterally against examiner’s hands
140
Mini-BESTest
Sensory Orientation
Stand, feet together, hands on hips, stand still (note 30 secs + or -)
7. STANCE (FEET TOGETHER); EYES OPEN, FIRM SURFACE,
8. STANCE (FEET TOGETHER); EYES CLOSED, FOAM SURFACE
9. INCLINE- EYES CLOSED, stand still on ramp with toes facing the higher side
141
48
Mini-BESTestDynamic gait: Begin walking normal speed, then
as commanded perform:
10. CHANGE IN GAIT SPEED, walk fast or slow
11. WALK WITH HORIZONTAL HEAD TURNS –, walk and turn head R/L
12. WALK WITH PIVOT TURNS, Turn 180 degrees, and stop rapidly, feet close together as you stop
142
Mini-BESTest13. STEP OVER OBSTACLES, walk normal pace, step
over the 9” box 10 ft away
14. TIMED UP & GO WITH DUAL TASK [3 m WALK]
Stand from chair, walk normal speed to tape, stop, turn and return to sit in the chair
(can modify #14 by asking pt. to count backward by threes as you walk from/to the chair)
(From: http://www.bestest.us/files/7413/6380/7277/MiniBEST_revised_final_3_8_13.pdf. Accessed 09/09/13)
143
Mini-BESTest“Clarifications on Scoring and Total Scoring:
• The Mini-BESTest should be scored out of 28 points to include 14 items that are scored from 0 to 2.
• For Item 3 (single-leg stance) and Item 6(compensatory lateral stepping), when compiling total score, use only the worst score.
• For Item 14, if a person's gait slows greater than 10% between the TUG with and without a dual task, the score should be decreased by a point. “
• (Quoted from Horak, F, and King, L, On the Mini-BESTest: Scoring and the Reporting of Total Scores Physical Therapy 2013;93(4): 571-575, in http://ptjournal.apta.org/content/93/4/571.full?sid=da3957b8-1a85-473e-97e1-976998d82501, Accessed 09/09/2013)
144
49
SCORING MINI-BESTEST14 Items from 0 to 2 points each of 28 total:
Sit to stand:
– 2= normal, stands without hands independently
– 1= moderate, uses hands, one try’
– 0= severe, unable or multiple tries using hands
Rise on toes:
-2= nml, stands on toes 3 seconds
-1= mod, heels up, partial ROM or loses balance
-0= sev, </= 3 secs.145
SCORING CONTINUEDStand on 1 leg
-2= nml, 20 secs.-1= mod, <20 secs-0= sev, unable
Compensatory stepping forward, feet shldr apart, lean forward on examiners hands
-2= nml, recovers balance with 1 step-1= mod, > 1 step to recover-0= falls or fails to step
146
SCORING CONTINUED
Compensatory stepping backward, feet shldr apart, lean backward on examiners hands
-2= nml, recovers balance with 1 step-1= mod, > 1 step to recover-0= falls or fails to step
Compensatory stepping lateral, feet together, lean sideways on examiners hands
-2= nml, recovers balance with 1 step-1= mod, > 1 step to recover-0= falls or fails to step
147
50
SCORING CONTINUED
Stand, eyes open, feet together, stay still on firm
-2=nml, 30 secs.
-1= mod, <30 s
-0= sev, unable
Stand, eyes closed, feet together, on foam
-2=nml, 30 secs.
-1= mod, <30 s
-0= sev, unable
148
SCORING CONTINUEDIncline- eyes open, feet shldr width apart, uphill
-2= nml, 30 secs aligns with ramp-1= mod, stands < 30 secs, aligns with ramp-0= sev, unable
Gait speed change- on command walk usual pace, then fast, then slow
-2=nml, changes pace without losing balance-1= mod, cannot alter pace without imbalance or change of pace-0=unable to maintain balance or alter pace
149
SCORING CONTINUEDObstacles- walk nml pace, step over box and continue:
-2=nml, steps over box, good balance, pace
-1=mod, slows or touches box
-0= steps around box or unable
Dual-task TUG- Usual TUG and second try with counting back by 3’s:
-2=nml, no obvious difference with dual
-1= mod, task affects gait or math by 10%+
-0=sev, stops walk or counting
150
51
151
BUT WE ARE IN A HURRY
Brief-BESTest: 8 items• Hip abduction
• Functional reach forward
• Single leg stance, (L and R)
• Compensatory stepping (L and R), lateral push and release
• Stand with eyes closed on foam
• Timed Up and Go Test (Padgett, et al , p. 1202)
152
BEStest, MiniBESTest, Brief BESTestPadgett, et al rated n=20 people with or without a
neuro dx. using all 3 tests
Results: Reliability for all versions was ICC >.98
Accuracy to ID people with or without neuro dx.=
• BESTest 78%
• MiniBESTest or brief BESTest 72%
All 3 tests specificity to ID nonfallers was 95-100%(Padgett, et al, 2012)
153
52
3 BESTest Versions: Accurate to ID Repeat Fallers with Parkinsons
Duncan et al tested n=80 patients with ParkinsonsDisease with prior falls using the 3 BESTestevaluations after 0, 6 and 12 months
Result: Correlation betw. Brief and Mini r=.94 and with BESTest r=.95
Brief BESTest retrospective accuracy in predicting falls =.82,
Sensitivity in predicting falls =.76; Specificity=.84
(Duncan, et al, 2013)
154
Mini-BESTest and Berg Balance Similar
Godi et al compared Mini-BEStest and Berg Balance Scale in N=90 patients with balance deficits
Results for test-retest reliability :
Mini-BESTest ICC=.96; MDC=3.5 points
BBS ICC=.92; MDC= 6.2 points
MDC -minimal detectable change
Mini-BEStest has lower ceiling effect and more accuracy to indicate balance improvement than BBS
(Godi, et al, 2013)155
Mini-BESTest for People with Stroke
Tsang, et al measured validity and reliability of Mini with n= 106 chronic stroke patients
Results:
• Internal consistency= Chronbach=.89-.94
• Interrater reliability ICC= .96,
• Intrarater reliability ICC= .97
• MDC= 3 points
• Use Mini-BESTest for patients with chronic stroke
(Tseng, et al, 2013)156
53
Use Brief-BESTest to save time!
ONE MAY RELY ON THE BRIEF VERSION
(Duncan, et al, 2013)
Validity, Reliability of Balance Tests• Prospective study: Lin et al. compared responsiveness,
validity, and reliability of balance tests in subjects > 65 yrs
• Counted # of falls every 3 months for 1 yr.
• Assessed 4 balance measures and ADLs
• Results: Tinetti was considered the best performance measure followed by the Timed Up And Go.
• Excellent test - retest reliability for all 4 tests
(Lin, et al) 158
Reliability with Dementia Patients
• Blankevoort, et al tested reliability of 6 perf. tests
• 6-m walk test (6WMT), Fig. of 8 Walk test (F8W),
• TUG, Chair Rise test, (CRT) Jamar dynamometer, on n=58 pts. with dementia aged 70-92y/o
• Reliability ICC=.90-.95 for F8W, TUG and Jamar
• ICC= .79-.86 for 6MWT, CRT
• (Blankevoort, et al, 2013)
159
54
Normative Values for Balance Tests
• Isles produced normative data for the timed up and go task, functional reach test, lateral reach test, and step test in 456 indep. females 20-80 yrs.
• Results: a significant effect for each test indicated progressive decline in balance over time.
• Normative data was published
• Showed high test-retest reliability (ICC= .95-.97) and a decline in scores for all tests with advancing age.
(Isles, et al, 2004)
160
BALANCE TEST MEANS PUBLISHED FOR COMMUNITY ELDERLY (Modified from Isles et al, p.1370)
AGE RANGE FUNCTIONALREACH TEST (cm)
LATERAL REACH TEST (cm)
TIMED GET UP AND GO (s)
STEP TEST (#)
20-29 YEARS 43(37)
23 5.3 21
30-39 41 23 5.4 20
40-49 40(35)
19 6.2 19
50-59 38(35)
18 6.4 17
60-69 37(35,30)
17(20)
7.2 (8,8.4,13)
16 (17.6,16,15.6)
70-79 34(26.7,29.6)
16(20)
8.5 (8.5,8,8.4) 14 (17.8,16,15.6)
161
Clinical Tests have High Reliability
• Steffen at al collected data on 4 clinical tests in 96 independent people 61-89 years old .
• Six minute walk test, Berg Balance Scale, Timed Up And Go, and comfortable and rapid gait speeds.
• Results: High test-retest reliability of all 4 tests, with age-related declines in performance
Authors gave age and gender referenced data
(Steffen, TM, et al. pp. 128-137)
162
55
Values for 6MWT, BBS, TUG & Gait Speed
Steffen, et al studied n=96 independent elders 61-89 y/o in the community for 4 tests:
• 6MWT, Berg (BBS), TUG, and comfortable and fast gait speeds (CGS,FGS)
• High test-retest reliability for all (ICC=.95-.97)
• All performances declined with age
(Steffen, TM, Hacker, TA, Mollinger, L, Age and Gender-Related Test performance in Community-Dwelling Elderly People: Six-Minute Walk Test, Berg Balance Scale, timed Up and Go Test, and Gait Speeds. Phys Ther.2002;82:128-137.)
163
Balance Tests Means in Elders 61-89y/o (Modified from Steffen, p. 133)
AGE 6MWT (meters) BBS TUG
60-69 M 572 55 8
60-69 F 538 55 8
70-79 M 527 54 9
70-79 F 471 53 9
80-89 M 417 53 10
80-89 F 392 50 11164
HIGHER LEVEL BALANCE TESTS
165
56
FOUR STEP SQUARE TEST• Need stopwatch and 4 canes or tape on the floor.
• Draw a square cross on the floor using canes or tape, number the square from 1 to 4 clockwise beginning at 10 o’clock to 2:00 to 4:00 to 8:00.
• Patient stands in box 1, ask him to face box 2 and step as quickly as possible into boxes 2, 3, 4, 1, THEN 4, 3, 2, and 1. Keep facing same direction.
• Use 2 trials, best score is used, time when 1st foot contacts floor of box 2
• (Dite and Temple, 2002)(www.rehabmeasures.org)166
FOUR SQUARE STEP TEST
1 →
↓↓
2↓
←←
4↑
→→
←3
↑↑
167
FOUR SQUARE STEP TEST VIDEO
168
57
Y BALANCE TEST (YBT)
• Tests risk for injury in sports
• Used for upper and lower quarter
• Based on STAR
• Client stands on 1 leg and reaches other leg in 3 different positions
• Measure the length of client’s reach: anterior, posteromedial and posterolateral
• Great for re-evaluation to show progress
169
STAR EXCURSION BALANCE TEST
• Setup: 4 pieces of tape on floor in shape of a + and x overlapping in the center, like a star
• Client stands on 1 foot in center, reaches other foot around the star in 8 directions
• Measure distance of each reach,
• Directions: reach L CW first, R CCW
• Differences in posteromedial reach identifies ankle instability
170
Y & STAR EXCURSION TESTS VIDEO
171
58
BREAK
172
Interventions to Promote Balance and Prevent Falls
Balance Rehabilitation:
“Identify and Treat modifiable deficits
Identify and compensate for fixed deficits”
Maximize independence
(Guccione, p. 290)
173
Balance Exercises- basic• May be performed lying to start, and
progress to sitting and standing:
• Shoulder shrugs• Shoulder retraction• Neck rotation • Quad sets• Glut sets
(Lewis, pp. 198-202)
174
59
Balance Exercises- basic
Performed in standing:• Chin tucks (lying, sitting or standing)• Leg lifts• Hip circles• Runners stretch• Heel raises, toe raises
(Lewis, pp. 198-202)175
Balance Exercises
• Single leg stance, look in all directions
• Double leg stance, with neck rotation
176
Balance Exercises
• Standing Romberg, feet parallel: do with eyes open, and with eyes closed
• Standing tandem Romberg
• Walking on a straight line: forward/backward
• Lateral stepping
• Heel and Toe walking
177
60
Balance Exercises
• Marching steps
• Braiding steps
• Walking at various speeds
• Walking, turning, changing direction
• Stepping in different directions (STAR, 4-step box)
• Balance Beam walking, forward and backward
178
More Balance Exercises
• Jumping, hopping
• Walk across variety of surfaces, eyes open/closed
• Standing on unstable surface: foam mat, rocker board, half-moon foam roller, full round foam roller, BOSU ball, double or single leg stance
• Therapeutic ball/ physioball programs using a variety of positions and activities while maintaining stability on the ball
179
More Balance Activities• Functional activities
• Reach in all different directions for objects at various heights
• Get up and down out of a chair
• Rise and lower self to the floor
• Transferring to a variety of surfaces at different heights
• Curb and stair climbing
• Walking up/ down ramps or inclines180
61
Functional Balance Activities
• Walk while carrying a variety of typical items in the home: book, plate of food, shopping bag, box, cup of water, pot
• Place objects on shelves of various heights
• Step over different obstacles
• Step around different obstacles
• Step over or walk around a moving obstacle (pet)
181
Community Balance Activities; FUN!• Tai Chi / Chi Kung• Wii balance and exercise programs• Functional activities• Yoga• Dancing• Hiking in the woods or on the beach
• BETTER COMPLIANCE WHEN HAVING FUN!
• Be sure patient has assistance if needed for guarding or balancing during community activities until independent
182
183
TAI CHI FOR BALANCE TRAINING
62
TAI CHI RESEARCHTaylor et al: RCT of 3 interventions in
n=684 community adults with 1+ falls risk factor (avg age 75y/o):
• tai chi 1/wk or 2/wk or control of low level exercise class 1/wk for 20 wks
• Falls rate reduced 58% in all groups significantly, continued for 12 months followup
• Balance and strength improved significantly
• No difference between groups
• 65% TC patients continued after the study ended184
TAI CHI FOR PEOPLE WITH DEMENTIAYao, et al did pre-post test design in n=22 comm.
dwelling Alzheimers-caregiver dyads
• Measured unipedal stance time (UST) and TUG
• 16 wks of “Positive Emotion Motivated Tai Chi Protocol” with caregiver
• UST improved wk #4 from 4.0-5.1, wk#16 to 5.6sec.
• TUG improved wk#4 from 13.2-11.6, wk#16 to 11.6
(Yao, et al, 2012)
185
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW and TAI CHI
Gillespie et al reviewed 159 trials on balance:
6 trials of 1625 patients using Tai Chi,
• Reported Tai Chi significantly reduced fall risk
• RR 0.71, 95% CI
(Gillespie, et al, 2012)186
63
Evidence-Based Outcomes on Exercise and Balance Interventions
Improvements in balance and reduction of falls has been demonstrated in the research.
The next slides offer samples of evidence-based research, primarily from systematic reviews and RCTs demonstrating the effects of interventions discussed in this seminar.
187
Targeted Exercise Intervention Improves Balance
• Yang et al RCT of n=165 comm. dwelling elders with mild balance dysfnctn
• 2 groups, 1 Otago Exercise Program, Visual Health Info Balance & Vestibular Kit, vs. 1 control
• After 6 mo., exercise group had significant improvement in Functional Reach (mean 2.95cm) Step Test (2.10 steps/15 secs), gait step width (2.17cm), hip abductor strength (0.020 in kg/body wt)
• Yang, et al, 2012)
188
Otago Home Program Exercises• Warmups of head, neck, trunk, back and ankle
movements
• Strengthening 10 reps quads, hams, abductors, calf and toe raises
• Balance ex: walk/turn (2x), retro walk, sideways walk (4x10 steps), knee bends (10), heel-toe walk 10 steps, heel-toe stand 10 s., 1-leg stand 10s., heel walk/toe walk (4x10steps), retro heel-toe walk 10 steps, sit to stand 5-10x, stair walk as tol., and
• 30min walk
• About 20 mins exercise over 5x/wk x 6 months (Yang. Et al, p. 28, and http://www.acc.co.nz)
189
64
EFFECT OF CORE TRAINING ON BALANCE AND FUNCTIONAL MOBILITY
Granacher, et al studied n=32 older adults who did 9 wk progressive core stability strength training exercise vs. control
Results: measured 10 m. walk, spinal mobility, Functional Reach Test and TUG
Exercise group improved in
spinal mobility 11%, stride velocity 9%, FRT 20%, and TUG 4% (p<.05)
(Granacher, et al, 2013)
190
Home Care Falls Prevention Program Effect on Balance
Whitney, et al studied charts of 11,667 patients with fall risk, over 65y/o, who had PT, OT, ST, or nursing services at home
Reviewed database of PT outcome data:
• Berg Balance BBS,
• Performance Oriented Measurement Assessment POMA,
• Dynamic Gait Index DGI, and
• modified Clinical Test of Sensory Integration and Balance, mCTSIB
191
MEANINGFUL CLINICAL GAINS
• Minimal detectable change MDC 95% was measured for each, with result of mean improvement in:
• BBS: 12 points (SD8)
• Tinetti POMA 8 points (SD4)
• DGI 7 points (SD4)
(Whitney, et al, 2012)
192
65
BALANCE EXERCISE IMPROVES FUNCTION AFTER TKA
• Piva et al did pilot dbl. blind RCT with n=43 pts.
– 2-6 mo. post total knee arthroplasty
• Compared functional outcomes for 2 interventions:
– supervised functional training (FT) 2x/wk x 6 wks or
– functional training (FT+B)plus balance ex. f/by 4 mo home ex program
Measured: gait speed, chair rise test, single-leg stance time (SLST)
and WOMAC and LE Functional Scale, adherence, pain, stiffness, and attrition
193
INTERVENTIONS USED FOR TKA• FT activities included exercise for warm-up,
strength, endurance, task-oriented exercises (chair stands, stairs, walk/bicycle) and cool-down
• FT+B activities added perturbation and agility work: side stepping, braiding, tandem walk, crossover steps, shuttle walk, direction changes, multidirectional balance perturbation standing on foam mat and also on tilt board, and roller board perturb. with 1 foot on platform, 1 on roller board
• Home programs for 4 mo 2x/wk (Piva, p. 894)
194
BALANCE EXERCISE IMPROVES FUNCTION AFTER TKA
• Both intervention groups improved in LE function
• More improvement for the Functional Training with Balance group than with the functional training alone group
• Particularly in SLST and gait speed
• Not statistically significant (pilot)
(Piva, et al, 2010)
66
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF FALL PREVENTION INTERVENTIONS
Gillespie et al reviewed RCTs of fall reduction interventions in 159 trials with 79,193 people to assess fall rate/yr and risk of falling between control and intervention groups
Significant reduction in fall rate and risk in • Multi-component exercise and home program
groups• Home safety assessmennt/modification groups
(Gillespie, et al, 2012)196
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW CONTINUED
Economic savings proven in:
-home based exercise for adults >80y/o
- home safety for adults with prior fall, and - --multi-component program addressing eight risk factors.
(Gillespie)
197
Physical Activity and Fall Related Efficacy
• Schepens et al: Meta- analysis of 20 studies comparing fall related efficacy to participation/activity measures.
• Results: positive correlation between fall-related efficacy and activity r=.53.
• There is a strong association between levels of occupational-based and basic-ADL activity performance and function and increased fall-related efficacy. (Schepens, S, et al., pp. 137-148)
198
67
Improvement in Balance with Mulitfactorial Programs
• Cadore et al : systematic review of the effects of exercise programs on balance, strength, fall risk, and gait from 1990-2012.
• Result: multicomponent exercise programs including balance training, endurance, and strength shows the most positive effect on improving gait, strength, balance and rate of falls in older frail adults .
(Cadore, 2013)
199
Validity of Studies on Exercise Effect on Falls Risk
• Systematic review of 4 databases from 2000-2010.
• Internal validity was described by the majority of the studies.
• There were few reports describing external validity and therefore one cannot generalize regarding the data on physical activity interventions for decreasing risk of falls. (McMahon, S, And Fleury, J, pp., 2140- 2154)
200
EXERCISE IMPROVES BALANCE AND MOBILITY TESTS
Yang, et al: RCT: n=165 adult community dwellers > 65 yrs with balance concerns
• Treatment group, n=83 : performed 6 months home exercise of balance and strengthening
• control group: n=82 did usual activities
(Yang, et al, 2012)
201
68
Yang, Continued
• Results: significant improvements in the treatment group for step test, functional reach test, hip abductor strength test, and gait step width
• Exercises included: warm-up ROM head, neck, trunk, back, and ankle, strengthening for knee, side hip, calf and toe raises, knee bends, walking forward, sideways and backward, heel and toe walking, forward/backward, stairs and walking (Yang, XJ, et al., pp. 24-37)
202
Balance and Strength Improves Falls Risk
Tofthagen et al did retrospective review of Pub med and CINAHL databases in 2011: studies of adult community dwellers.
• Evidence supports the use of balance and strength training programs for community dwelling adults at high risk for falls, including patients with peripheral neuropathy.
(Tofthagen, C, et al., pp. E416-E424)
203
EFFECT OF “LIFE” TRAINING ON FALL RATE and FUNCTIONAL TESTS
Clemson et al: randomized parallel trial of subjects 70 years+ with 2+ falls or 1 fall-related injury in the past year. Three interventions:
• Group 1: Lifestyle integrated functional exercise, (LIFE) (strength /balance training and selected activities),
• Group 2: structured program of balance/ leg strength exercises 3x/wk
• Performed 5 sessions + 2 booster sessions + phone calls
204
69
FALL RATE REDUCED BY BALANCE AND STRENGTH TRAINING
• Group 3: Sham control of gentle exercise over 3 home visits
• Results: measured rate of falls after 3, 6, and 12 months, LIFE intervention group had
• 31% significant reduction in fall rate
• improved static balance, function, ankle strength, and participation for LIFE program vs. controls
(Clemson, L, et al., From http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PMC/articles/PMC 3413733. Accessed 2/24/13)
205
LIFE PROGRAM ACTIVITIES
• Activities are performed as part of ADLs during the day
• Examples of LIFE program include:
• Weight shift, narrowing BOS, move to sway limits, turn changing direction, step over obstacles, stand on 1 leg, tandem stand, on toes, on heels, walk sideways, up stairs, knee bends, pickup objects from floor
(Clemson, p. 2)
206
WHAT WORKS FOR BALANCE•Tai Chi reduces fall risk.
•Changing from multifocal lenses to single vision lenses reduced falls in people who were active in outside activities
•Fall rate was reduced by withdrawal of psychotropic medication
•Home safety assessment and modification reduced rate of falls and fall risk
Gillespie LD, et al., From: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22972103. Accessed 2/24/13) 207
70
WHAT WORKS?
Gillespie et al reviewed RCTs of fall reduction programs for community dwelling adults:
compared fall rates between treatment and control groups.
• Exercise was the most common intervention, followed by multi-factorial interventions.
208
WHAT WORKS?
• Rate of falls and fall risk was reduced by home and group exercise programs.
• Multifactorial intervention and assessment programs reduce fall rates.
(Gillespie LD., et al., From: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22972103. Accessed 2/24/13)
209
210
71
Fall Prevention Recommendations: AGS Panel on Falls Prevention
• Use long-term balance and exercise training
• Environmental modifications
• Medication Review and Adjustment
• Assistive Devices (walker, cane, hip protector, bed alarms)
• Education and Behavioral Interventions
(From: http://www.betterbalancefallprevention.com/images/researcharticl.Accessed 2/24/13)
211
AGS Panel on Falls Prevention: Considerations Requiring More Evidence
• Visual Intervention
• Patient Education
• Medical management of diseases/impairments affecting balance, cardiovascular meds
• Footwear alterations
• Restraints
(From: http://www.betterbalancefallprevention.com/images/researcharticl.Accessed 2/24/13)
212
Conclusion About Exercise and Balance Programs
• Fall risk and incidence are reduced
• Multiple factors are improved by exercise and balance interventions
• Many balance assessment tools are valid and reliable
THEY WORK!
213
72
214
THANK YOU!
Free videos on hands-on therapies:
www.educise.com
Like us on Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/Educiseresourcesinc
www.MyMetaPhysicalTherapist.com
215
Faculty BiographyTheresa A. Schmidt, PT,DPT,MS,OCS,LMT,CEAS is a Board-certified specialist in orthopedic physical therapy, massage therapist, personal trainer, certified ergonomic assessment specialist. She is CEO of Flex Physical Therapy & EduciseResources Inc., continuing education in Long Island, NY. She has served as faculty of Physical Therapy at Touro College in NY, PT/PTA Programs, and adjunct professor at CUNY Queens College and Nassau Community College. She presents internationally on orthopedic rehab, fitness and alternative medicine. Her programs include: myofascial release, craniosacral, positional release/strain-counterstrain, joint mobilization, muscle energy, precision exercise, Reiki and complementary therapy. She presented for: Fascia Research Congress, APTA, AMTA, Cleveland Clinic, NASA InomedicHealth, & private medical clinics. She graduated with Highest Honors from Long Island University’s Physical Therapy Program in Brooklyn, NY, and received her Doctorate in Physical Therapy from University of New England. Dr. Schmidt provides 1:1 health consultations, tutorials and seminars. (877)281-3382
Visit www.educise.com & Facebook Educise Resources Inc
216
73
REFERENCESBerg K. Measuring balance in the elderly: Validation of an instrument [Dissertation].
Montreal, Canada: McGill University, 1993.
Bohannon, RW, Reference Values For Extremity Muscle Strength Obtained By Hand Held Dynamometry From Adults In Each 20 To 79 Years. Archives Of Physical Medicine And Rehabilitation 1997; 78(1): 26-32.
Bohannon, RW, Larkin, PA, Cook, Ac, Gear, J, And Singer, J, Decrease In Timed Balance Test Scores With Aging. Physical Therapy 1984 64:7, 1067- 1070.
Cadore, EL, et al. Effects Of Different Exercise Interventions On Risk Of Falls, Capability And Balance In Physically Frail Older Adults. A Systematic Review Rejuvenation Research , January 2013, from http;//online.liebertpub.com/doi/abs/10.1089/rej.2012.1397. Accessed 2/24/13.
Clemson, L., et al. Integration Of Balance And Strength Training Into Daily Life Activity To Reduce Rate Of Falls In Older People ( The LIFE Study): Randomized Parallel Trial. British Medical Journal 2012 August 7. From http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PMC/articles/PMC 3413733. Accessed 2/24/13.
217
218
Dite, w. and Temple, VA, A Clinical Test of Stepping and Change of Direction to Identify Multiple Falling Older Adults. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 83(11):1566-1571
Gillespie LD, et al. Interventions For Preventing Falls In Older People Living In The Community. Cochrane Database Of Systematic Reviews 2012; 12; 9: CD 007146, From: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22972103. Accessed 2/24/13.
Guccione, AA,. Geriatric Physical Therapy. St. Louis: Mosby. 2000.
Isles, RC, et al., Normal Values Of Balance Tests In Women Aged 20 To 80. Journal Of The American Geriatrics Society 2004 52(8):1367- 1372.
Leipzig, RM, et al. Drugs and Falls in Older People: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis: I. Psychotropic Drugs. J Am Geriatr Soc 1999;47:30-39.
Lin, M, et al. Psychometric Comparisons Of The Time Up And Go, One- Leg Stand, Functional Reach, and Tinetti Balance Measures In Community Dwelling Older People. Journal Of The American Geriatrics Society 2004; 52(8): 1343-1348.
Lewis, Carol B., Improving Mobility in Older Persons, A Manual for Geriatric Specialists. Baltimore, Great Seminars and Books. 2001.
Lewis, Carol B., The Functional Toolbox II. Bethesda, Great Seminars and Books. 2000
219
Marchetti, GF, et al, Temporal and Spatial Characteristics of Gait During Performance of the Dynamic Gait Index in People With and People Without Balance or Vestibular Disorders. Physical Therapy 2008; 88(5):640-651.
McMahon, S, And Fleury, J, External Validity Of Physical Activity Interventions For Community Dwelling Older Adults With Fall Risk: A Quantitative Systematic Literature Review. Journal Of Advanced Nursing 2012;68(10):2140- 2154.
Mecagni, C, Pullliam Smith, J, Roberts, KE, And O’Sullivan, SB, Balance And Ankle Range Of Motion In Community Dwelling Women Aged 64 To 87 Years: A Correlational Study. Physical Therapy 2000 810 :1004-1011.
Schepens, S, Sen, A, et al. Relationship Between Fall-Related Efficacy And Activity Engagement In Community-Dwelling Older Adults: A Meta-Analytic Review. American Journal Of Occupational Therapy 2012 66:2 137-148.
Simonson, W. (1984). Medications and the Elderly: a guide for Promoting Proper Use. Rockville, MD: Aspen.
Special Series: Clinical practice: Guideline for the Prevention of Falls in Older Persons, American Geriatrics Society (AGS) Panel on Falls in Older Persons, From: http://www.betterbalancefallprevention.com/images/researcharticl... Accessed 2/24/13.
74
220
Steffen, TM, et al. Age- And Gender-Related Test Performance In Community Dwelling Elderly People: Six Minute Walk Test, Work Balance Scale, Timed Up And Go Test, And Gait Speeds. Physical Therapy 2002; 82:128-137.
Tinetti, ME, Performance Oriented Assessment Of Mobility Problems In Elderly Patients. JAGS 1986; 34(2):119-12.
Tinetti, ME,Preventing Falls in Elderly Persons.N Engl J Med 2003; 348:42-49
Tofthagen, C, Visovsky, C, And Berry, DL, Strength And Balance Training For Adults With Peripheral Neuropathy And A High Risk Of Fall: Current Evidence And Implications For Future Research. Oncology Nursing Forum .2012; 39(5): E416-E424.
Vereech, L, Wuyts, F, et al, Clinical Assessment of Balance Normative Data and Gender and Age Effects. Int. J. Audiol 47(2):67-75.
Vialle, R, Levassor, N, Rillardon, L, Templier, A, Skalli, W, and guigui, P, Radiographic Analysis of the Safgittal Alignment and Balance of the Spine in Asymptiomatic Subjects J bone Joint Surg am. 2005;87(2):260-267.
Whitney, S, Wrisley, D, And Furman, J, Concurrent Validity Of The Berg Balance Scale And The Dynamic Gait Index In People With A Vestibular Dysfunction. Physiotherapy Research International . 2003;8(4): 178-186.
221
Wolfson, L, et al, Gait Assessment in the Elderly: A Gait Abnormality Rating Scale and its Relation to Falls. Jnl. Gerontology 1990; 45(1): M12-19.
Yang, XJ, Hill, et all. Effect It Is A Targeted Exercise Intervention In Reversing Older People's Mild Balance Dysfunction: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Physical Therapy 2012; 92:24-37.
From: http://www.cdc.gov/homeandrecreationalsafety/falls/adultfalls.html. Accessed 2/25/12.
From: http://www.betterbalance fall Prevention.com/images/ResearchArticle. Accessed 2/21/13.
From: http://www.cdc.gov/HomeandRecreationalSafety/Falls/nursing.html. Accessed 2/25/12.
ACCESS THE BALANCE EXAMS ATWWW.REHABMEASURES.ORG FOR FREE!
THANK YOU! WWW.EDUCISE.COM
222
75
DISCLAIMER
In the efforts to comply with the appropriate boards/associations, I declare that I do NOT have
an affiliation with or financial interest in a commercial organization that could pose a conflict
of interest with my presentation.
Theresa A. Schmidt
223