Presentation Title

Comparison Across Height Groups Between the Forward Functional Reach (FFR) Test and Other Fall Risk Outcome Measures to Identify Fall Risk Among Older Adults

Speaker Credentials

Associate Professor

Speaker Credentials

Ph.D.

College

Dr. Pallavi Patel College of Health Care Sciences, PT

Location

Nova Southeastern University, Davie, Florida, USA

Format

Poster

Start Date

21-2-2020 8:30 AM

End Date

21-2-2020 4:00 PM

Abstract

BACKGROUND/Purpose: The Forward Functional Reach (FFR) test assesses anterior/posterior movement to identify fall risk. Previous studies have used the same cut value to identify fall risk for all people. The purpose of this study was to determine a correlation between FFR and other fall risk measures based on individual height. Methods: Participants age 60 plus were recruited from a senior activity center. Participants’ height was measured using a stadiometer then each performed FRR test using the 1-arm reaching method followed by completing: Fall/medical history, Activities Based Confidence Scale, Timed up and Go, & grip strength. Analysis utilized descriptive statistics and a Pearson correlation between FFR and each outcome measure. RESULTS: Sixty-six participants were stratified into height groups: < 65”, 65” to 69”, >69”. Using 10” cut value for all groups, low correlations were found between FFR and each measure: Grip Strength: +0.45, ABC: +0.25, Fall history: +0.05 and TUG:-0.33. Only the medium height group was accurately identified as fall risk by the FFR when identified by at least one other measure. FFR only identified 44% in the short height and 53% in the tallest height group as fall risk. Conclusion: Using the current criterion of a single value (10”) as a cutoff for FFR is not supported by this study; with results of 66% false positives in the short height group and 47% false negative in the tall height group. Future studies should look at individual markers of fall risk for the FFR based on height of the individual.

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS
 
Feb 21st, 8:30 AM Feb 21st, 4:00 PM

Comparison Across Height Groups Between the Forward Functional Reach (FFR) Test and Other Fall Risk Outcome Measures to Identify Fall Risk Among Older Adults

Nova Southeastern University, Davie, Florida, USA

BACKGROUND/Purpose: The Forward Functional Reach (FFR) test assesses anterior/posterior movement to identify fall risk. Previous studies have used the same cut value to identify fall risk for all people. The purpose of this study was to determine a correlation between FFR and other fall risk measures based on individual height. Methods: Participants age 60 plus were recruited from a senior activity center. Participants’ height was measured using a stadiometer then each performed FRR test using the 1-arm reaching method followed by completing: Fall/medical history, Activities Based Confidence Scale, Timed up and Go, & grip strength. Analysis utilized descriptive statistics and a Pearson correlation between FFR and each outcome measure. RESULTS: Sixty-six participants were stratified into height groups: < 65”, 65” to 69”, >69”. Using 10” cut value for all groups, low correlations were found between FFR and each measure: Grip Strength: +0.45, ABC: +0.25, Fall history: +0.05 and TUG:-0.33. Only the medium height group was accurately identified as fall risk by the FFR when identified by at least one other measure. FFR only identified 44% in the short height and 53% in the tallest height group as fall risk. Conclusion: Using the current criterion of a single value (10”) as a cutoff for FFR is not supported by this study; with results of 66% false positives in the short height group and 47% false negative in the tall height group. Future studies should look at individual markers of fall risk for the FFR based on height of the individual.