The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Does chair type influence outcome in the timed 'Up and Go' test?

Does chair type influence outcome in the timed 'Up and Go' test?
Does chair type influence outcome in the timed 'Up and Go' test?
Objective To test the effects of the use of a collapsible, portable chair (chair B), as opposed to a ‘standard’ chair (chair A), on the outcome of the timed “Up and Go” (TUG) test.
Design Cross-sectional.
Setting Multipurpose senior centres.
Participants Mobile older persons (N=118, mean age 77 years (range 62–99 years)).
Outcome measures Time to complete the timed “Up and Go” test using chair A and chair B, and inter-rater agreement in the time scores.
Results Time taken to complete the TUG test did not differ by chair type [median (interquartile range, IQR) = 12.3 (9.53–15.9) and 12.6 (9.7–16.6)] seconds for Chair A and B respectively, p-value=0.87. In multiple regression analyses, factors that impacted on time difference in test performance for the two chairs were use of a walking aid during the test [Odds ratio (OR) = 3.7 95%CI 1.1–11.9, p=0.031], observed difficulty with mobility (OR= 27.7 95%CI 2.6–290, p=0.006), and a history of arthritis in the knees (OR= 2.9 95%CI 1.0–8.7, P=0.05). In an inter-rater agreement analysis, no significant difference was found between time scores recorded by the two raters; median (IQR) = 12.4 (10.9–15.9) and 12.3 (7.2–59.1) seconds for the occupation therapist and for the research assistant, respectively (Wilcoxon matched pairs test, p=0.124, Spearman correlation coefficient = 0.99, p<0.001).
Conclusion The use of a portable canvas chair with standardised specifications offers an acceptable alternative to the use of a ‘standard’ chair in assessments of fall risk using the TUG test in field settings where field workers are reliant on public transport.
timed “Up and Go” test, chair type, inter-rater agreement, falls, older persons
1279-7707
319-323
Kalula, S.
d7d9e0cb-f088-4b7a-9805-6bc261221143
Swingler, G.
67c5617a-9f92-4860-b491-638b3776a146
Sayer, A.A.
fb4c2053-6d51-4fc1-9489-c3cb431b0ffb
Badri, M.
6a25b193-ce51-49ce-a5f0-237cd2dac8ba
Ferreira, M.
b5be3feb-11a0-4691-8265-6a8f9eb39ee3
Kalula, S.
d7d9e0cb-f088-4b7a-9805-6bc261221143
Swingler, G.
67c5617a-9f92-4860-b491-638b3776a146
Sayer, A.A.
fb4c2053-6d51-4fc1-9489-c3cb431b0ffb
Badri, M.
6a25b193-ce51-49ce-a5f0-237cd2dac8ba
Ferreira, M.
b5be3feb-11a0-4691-8265-6a8f9eb39ee3

Kalula, S., Swingler, G., Sayer, A.A., Badri, M. and Ferreira, M. (2010) Does chair type influence outcome in the timed 'Up and Go' test? The Journal of Nutrition, Health & Aging, 14 (4), 319-323. (doi:10.1007/s12603-009-0181-z).

Record type: Article

Abstract

Objective To test the effects of the use of a collapsible, portable chair (chair B), as opposed to a ‘standard’ chair (chair A), on the outcome of the timed “Up and Go” (TUG) test.
Design Cross-sectional.
Setting Multipurpose senior centres.
Participants Mobile older persons (N=118, mean age 77 years (range 62–99 years)).
Outcome measures Time to complete the timed “Up and Go” test using chair A and chair B, and inter-rater agreement in the time scores.
Results Time taken to complete the TUG test did not differ by chair type [median (interquartile range, IQR) = 12.3 (9.53–15.9) and 12.6 (9.7–16.6)] seconds for Chair A and B respectively, p-value=0.87. In multiple regression analyses, factors that impacted on time difference in test performance for the two chairs were use of a walking aid during the test [Odds ratio (OR) = 3.7 95%CI 1.1–11.9, p=0.031], observed difficulty with mobility (OR= 27.7 95%CI 2.6–290, p=0.006), and a history of arthritis in the knees (OR= 2.9 95%CI 1.0–8.7, P=0.05). In an inter-rater agreement analysis, no significant difference was found between time scores recorded by the two raters; median (IQR) = 12.4 (10.9–15.9) and 12.3 (7.2–59.1) seconds for the occupation therapist and for the research assistant, respectively (Wilcoxon matched pairs test, p=0.124, Spearman correlation coefficient = 0.99, p<0.001).
Conclusion The use of a portable canvas chair with standardised specifications offers an acceptable alternative to the use of a ‘standard’ chair in assessments of fall risk using the TUG test in field settings where field workers are reliant on public transport.

This record has no associated files available for download.

More information

Published date: 2010
Keywords: timed “Up and Go” test, chair type, inter-rater agreement, falls, older persons

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 147163
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/147163
ISSN: 1279-7707
PURE UUID: 2b1596cb-3967-4b6c-9c02-7c8ff908ec1c

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 23 Apr 2010 12:15
Last modified: 14 Mar 2024 00:58

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: S. Kalula
Author: G. Swingler
Author: A.A. Sayer
Author: M. Badri
Author: M. Ferreira

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×