Presentation Title

Differences in Reach Distance on the Forward Functional Reach (FRR) Test Between Three Height Groups 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: Loss of balance is a significant factor for falls in the aging population. The Forward Functional Reach (FFR) test, developed by Duncan et al (1990), assesses anterior/posterior (AP) balance and identify fall risk. Previous study results using FFR have been variable, possibly because an individual’s height was not considered in reach distance. The purpose of this study was to determine if an individual’s height is related to FFR distance. Methods: Participants age 60 plus were recruited from a senior activity center. Participants’ height was measured using a stadiometer. Each participant performed the FRR test using the 1-arm reaching method per the protocol by Duncan (1990). Analysis done included: Descriptive statistics to describe sample characteristics; Pearson correlation to examine the relationship between reach and height; and ANOVA to analyze differences in reach distance between height groups. Results: Sixty-six participants were stratified into height groups: < 65 inches, 65 and 69 inches, >69 inches. A moderate correlation (r=0.63) between height and reach was found. A statistically significant difference between the height groups for the unilateral forward functional reach (p=3.03x10-6). Conclusion: Height is a factor FFR distance and should be considered in the interpretation of testing. Using a single value (10”) as a cutoff per the current criterion to identify fall risk, is not supported by this study. Each height group should have an identified cut score value for more accurate fall risk identification. Other factors to consider include: quality of movement of the individuals including substitution and movement variability.

This document is currently not available here.

Share

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

Differences in Reach Distance on the Forward Functional Reach (FRR) Test Between Three Height Groups Among Older Adults

Nova Southeastern University, Davie, Florida, USA

Background & Purpose: Loss of balance is a significant factor for falls in the aging population. The Forward Functional Reach (FFR) test, developed by Duncan et al (1990), assesses anterior/posterior (AP) balance and identify fall risk. Previous study results using FFR have been variable, possibly because an individual’s height was not considered in reach distance. The purpose of this study was to determine if an individual’s height is related to FFR distance. Methods: Participants age 60 plus were recruited from a senior activity center. Participants’ height was measured using a stadiometer. Each participant performed the FRR test using the 1-arm reaching method per the protocol by Duncan (1990). Analysis done included: Descriptive statistics to describe sample characteristics; Pearson correlation to examine the relationship between reach and height; and ANOVA to analyze differences in reach distance between height groups. Results: Sixty-six participants were stratified into height groups: < 65 inches, 65 and 69 inches, >69 inches. A moderate correlation (r=0.63) between height and reach was found. A statistically significant difference between the height groups for the unilateral forward functional reach (p=3.03x10-6). Conclusion: Height is a factor FFR distance and should be considered in the interpretation of testing. Using a single value (10”) as a cutoff per the current criterion to identify fall risk, is not supported by this study. Each height group should have an identified cut score value for more accurate fall risk identification. Other factors to consider include: quality of movement of the individuals including substitution and movement variability.