The Mobility Performance of the Elderly Before, During and After Crossing Over an Obstacle
Languages of publication
Purpose. Tripping over objects is a major cause of fall-related injuries. The elderly feature decreased locomotor velocity with aging and delays in locomotion when encountering obstacles. Numerous studies have analyzed how the mobility performance of the elderly is affected when crossing over an obstacle. However, how is mobility performance affected when performing sequences of various locomotor movements (gait, changing direction, standing up and sitting down) that make up activities of daily living? To answer this question, this study investigated the changes in locomotor velocity when encountering an obstacle during various locomotor movements in both older adults and young adults by using the TUG, a representative mobility test. Methods. Thirty older adults who were judged to be able to walk independently by the Berg Balance Scale (BSS) (age: 70.0 ± 6.94 yrs; BB S: 54.7 ± 1.78 pts) and seventeen male young adults (age: 21.7 ± 2.37 yrs) participated in the “Timed Up & Go” (TUG) test with and without an obstacle. Using the TUG score (the total time required to complete the test), a rate of the total times (with an obstacle/ without an obstacle) was calculated to create an index of the decline in mobility performance by the obstacle. Results. The decline in the mobility performance of the elderly was significantly larger than the young adults for the following measurements: in the single stance phases just before and after an obstacle, the time needed to change direction 180 degrees, and for level walking after crossing over an obstacle. Conclusions. The elderly require a longer period of time for stepping over obstacles. Gait and the ability to change direction after encountering an obstacle was found to be slower when compared to the younger male population.
1 - 11 - 2012
26 - 01 - 2013
- 1. Cumming R.G., Salkeld G., Thomas M., Szonyi G., Prospective study of the impact of fear of falling on activities of daily living, SF-36 scores, and nursing home admission. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci, 2000, 55 (5), 299-305.[Crossref]
- 2. Legters K., Fear of falling. Phys Ther, 2002, 82 (3), 264-272.[PubMed]
- 3. Boulgarides L.K., McGinty S.M., Willett J.A., Barnes C.W., Use of clinical and impairment-based tests to predict falls by community-dwelling older adults. Phys Ther, 2003, 83 (4), 328-339.[PubMed]
- 4. Muto Y., Ohta M., Hasegawa A., Yamada Y., Sugiyama A., Review: Fall prevention [in Japanese]. Clinical OrthopedicsSurgery, 2005, 45 (2), 537-548.
- 5. Pavol M.J., Owings T.M., Foley K.T., Grabiner M.D., Mechanisms leading to a fall from an induced trip in healthy older adults. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci, 2001, 56A (7), 428-437.[Crossref]
- 6. Pavol M.J., Owings T.M., Foley K.T., Grabiner M.D., Gait characteristics as risk factors for falling from trips induced in older adults. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci, 1999, 54 (11), 583-590.[Crossref]
- 7. Schillings A.M., Mulder Th., Duysens J., Stumbling over obstacles in older adults compared to young adults. J Neurophysiol, 2005, 94 (2), 1158-1168, doi: 10.1152/ jn.00396.2004.[Crossref][PubMed]
- 8. Troy K.L., Grabiner M.D., The presence of an obstacle influences the stepping response during induced trips andsurrogate tasks. Exp Brain Res, 2005, 161 (3), 343-350, doi: 10.1007/s00221-004-2078-8.[PubMed][Crossref]
- 9. Galna B., Peters A., Murphy A.T., Morris M.E., Obstacle crossing deficits in older adults: a systematic review. GaitPosture, 2009, 30 (3), 270-275, doi: 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2009.05.022.[WoS][Crossref]
- 10. Chen H.C., Ashton-Miller J.A., Alexander N.B., Schultz A.B., Stepping over obstacles: gait patterns of healthy young and old adults. J Gerontol, 1991, 46 (6), M196-203.[Crossref]
- 11. Kovacs C.R., Age-related changes in gait and obstacle avoidance capabilities in older adults: A review. J ApplGerontol, 2005, 24 (1), 21-34, doi: 10.1177/0733464804271279.[Crossref]
- 12. Chen H.C., Ashton-Miller J.A., Alexander N.B., Schultz A.B., Effects of age and available response-time on ability to step over an obstacle. J Gerontol, 1994, 49 (5), M227.[Crossref]
- 13. Podsiadlo D., Richardson S., The timed “Up & Go”: a test of basic functional mobility for frail elderly persons. J AmGeriatr Soc, 1991, 39 (2), 142-148.
- 14. Berg K.O., Maki B.E., Williams J.I., Holliday P.J., Wood- Dauphinee S.L., Clinical and laboratory measures of postural balance in an elderly population. Arch Phys MedRehabil, 1992, 73 (11), 1073-1080.
- 15. Himann J.E., Cunningham D.A., Rechnitzer P.A., Paterson D.H., Age-related changes in speed of walking. MedSci Sports Exerc, 1988, 20 (2), 161-166.[Crossref]
- 16. Murray M.P., Kory R.C., Clarkson B.H., Walking patterns in healthy old men. J Gerontol, 1969, 24 (2), 169-178.[Crossref][PubMed]
- 17. Nakano W., Ohashi Y., The influence of age and walking speed on the adjustment of step length for stepping over obstacles. Rigakuryoho kagaku, 2010, 37 (3), 153-159.
- 18. Begg R.K., Sparrow W.A., Gait characteristics of young and older individuals negotiating a raised surface: implications for the prevention of falls. J Gerontol A Biol Sci MedSci, 2000, 55 (3), M147-154, doi: 10.1093/gerona/55.3.M147.[Crossref]
- 19. Weerdesteyn V., Nienhuis B., Duysens J., Advancing age progressively affects obstacle avoidance skills in the elderly. Hum Mov Sci, 2005, 24 (5-6), 865-880, doi: 10.1016/j. humov.2005.10.013.[PubMed][Crossref]
- 20. Patla A.E., Visual control of step length during overground locomotor: task-specific modulation of the locomotor synergy. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform, 1989, 15 (3), 603-617, doi: 10.1037/0096-15126.96.36.1993.[Crossref]
- 21. Patla A.E., Understanding the roles of vision in the control of human locomotor. Gait Posture, 1997, 5, 54-69, doi: 10.1016/S0966-6362(96)01109-5.[Crossref]
- 22. Varraine E., Bonnard M., Pailhous J., Intentional on-line adaptation of stride length in human walking. Exp BrainRes, 2000, 130 (2), 248-257, doi: 10.1007/s002219900234.[Crossref]
Publication order reference