Barraco, Robert D, MD, MPH

Chow, Richard, DO

Greenberg, Marna R, DO, MPH, FACEP

Jacoby, Jeanne L, MD

Kane, Bryan G, MD

English

Lehigh Valley Health Network: LVHN Scholarly Works

Lehigh Valley Health NetworkLVHN Scholarly WorksDepartment of Emergency MedicineGender Differences in Effectiveness of the "TimedUp and Go" (TUG) Test as a Screening Tool forGeriatric Fall Risk Assessment.Richard Chow DOLehigh Valley Health Network, Richard.Chow@lvhn.orgMarna R. Greenberg DO, MPH, FACEPLehigh Valley Health Network, marna.greenberg@lvhn.orgJeanne L. Jacoby MDLehigh Valley Health Network, Jeanne_L.Jacoby@lvhn.orgRobert D. Barraco MD, MPHLehigh Valley Health Network, robert_d.barraco@lvhn.orgBryan G. Kane MDLehigh Valley Health Network, bryan.kane@lvhn.orgFollow this and additional works at: https://scholarlyworks.lvhn.org/emergency-medicinePart of the Emergency Medicine CommonsThis Poster is brought to you for free and open access by LVHN Scholarly Works. It has been accepted for inclusion in LVHN Scholarly Works by anauthorized administrator. For more information, please contact LibraryServices@lvhn.org.Published In/Presented AtChow, R. Greenberg, M. R., Jacoby, J. L., Barraco, R. D., Kane, B. G. (2017, September 14-16). Gender Differences in Effectiveness of the"Timed Up and Go" (TUG) Test as a Screening Tool for Geriatric Fall Risk Assessment. Poster Presented at: The 8th Congress of theInternational Society of Gender Medicine, Miyagi, Japan.© 2017 Lehigh Valley Health Network  This prospective cohort study was conducted at a Level 1 Trauma center in Pennsylvania, USA.  After obtained informed consent, subjects were asked to perform the TUG test.  This involved having the patient stand up from a chair and walk 10 feet, turn, walk back to the chair and sit down.  If the patient took ≥ 12 seconds to complete the test they were considered to have a positive TUG test. Subjects were contacted for phone follow-up and asked to self-report interim falling.  CONCLUSIONS: In this small prospective cohort, the TUG test didn’t perform well at predicting future falls. However, it was more sensitive and less specific in men than women. RESULTS:METHODOLOGY:The Timed-Up-and-Go (TUG) test is recommended as a screening tool to identify elderly patients who may be at increased risk for a mechanical fall. We set out to determine if there were gender differences in the effectiveness of the TUG test.INTRODUCTIONData from ninety-two subjects was analyzed. The average age of the participants was 74.8 years old. Fifty-two were female (43.4%). By sixth months after enrollment, 30/92 participants reported having falling. Of the 30 who fell, 12 were men and 18 women.  Of the men who fell, 3/9 were TUG positive and 11/18 women who fell were positive. Twenty-nine men denied falling-- 20 were TUG positive and 9 negative. Thirty-three women denied falling -- 18 were TUG positive and 15 negative. For men, the sensitivity of the TUG test was 75% and specificity 31%. A positive TUG test in men had a positive likelihood ratio of 1.087 and a positive predictive value of 31%. For women, the sensitivity of the TUG test was 61% and the specificity 45%. A positive TUG test in women had a positive likelihood ratio of 1.12 and a positive predictive value of 37%. Lehigh Valley Health Network/USF Morsani College of Medicine, Allentown, PAGender Differences in Effectiveness of the “Timed Up and Go” (TUG) Test as a Screening Tool for Geriatric Fall Risk Assessment Richard Chow, DO, Marna Rayl Greenberg, DO, MPH, Jeanne L. Jacoby, MD, Robert D. Barraco, MD, MPH, Bryan G. Kane, MD

Gender Differences in Effectiveness of the  Timed Up and Go  (TUG) Test as a Screening Tool for Geriatric Fall Risk Assessment.

https://scholarlyworks.lvhn.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1524&context=emergency-medicine

Gender Differences in Effectiveness of the Timed Up and Go (TUG) Test as a Screening Tool for Geriatric Fall Risk Assessment.

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Lehigh Valley Health Network: LVHN Scholarly Works