MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210594379 · doi:10.1159/000521001

Instrumented Functional Test for Objective Outcome Evaluation of Balance Rehabilitation in Elderly Fallers: A Clinical Study

2022· article· en· W4210594379 on OpenAlexaff
Alireza Noamani, Albert H. Vette, Hossein Rouhani

Bibliographic record

VenueGerontology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicBalance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
Canadian institutionsGlenrose Rehabilitation HospitalAlberta Health ServicesUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBerg Balance ScaleBalance (ability)RehabilitationPhysical medicine and rehabilitationTimed Up and Go testPhysical therapyMedicineGeriatricsBalance problemsActivities of daily living

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Observational tests, e.g., the Berg Balance Scale (BBS) are widely used for balance evaluation in the elderly fallers. However, they do not allow objective outcome evaluation of rehabilitative interventions. This study aimed to investigate, in a clinical setting, the use of inertial measurement units (IMUs) integrated into the BBS test for objective outcome evaluation of balance rehabilitation in elderly fallers compared to conventional BBS scores. METHODS: Thirty-six elderly fallers were recruited from the in-patient population of a geriatrics Clinic. Participants performed the BBS test while wearing 3 IMUs placed on the sternum, sacrum, and tibia of the dominant leg following admission to the clinic. Subsequently, they completed a rehabilitation program for 2-4 weeks. They performed a similar test before their discharge. The physical therapist recorded the BBS scores at both sessions, and the sensor data of the 2-min quiet standing task (BBS task 2) were extracted for objective balance evaluation. Moreover, eleven young adults were recruited to perform a 2-min quiet standing test while wearing the same IMUs. Center-of-pressure (COP) and segmental center-of-mass (COM) accelerations were calculated to estimate time-domain, frequency-domain, and intersegment coordination biomarkers of balance. RESULTS: COP time- and frequency-domain measures, COM acceleration time-domain measures, and intersegment coordination measures could identify age-related changes in balance of seniors compared to young adults (p < 0.05). Moreover, balance biomarkers of senior adults exhibited a reduced sway acceleration and jerkiness in the medial-lateral direction post-rehabilitation (p < 0.05). Although the total BBS scores increased post-rehabilitation, sway displacement and velocity did not significantly improve. We observed a significant association between pelvis-leg coordination at high sway oscillations and the total BBS scores pre- and post-rehabilitation. CONCLUSION: IMUs enable not only the characterization of underlying causes of impaired balance but also the identification of improved and yet impaired aspects of balance post-rehabilitation. Hence, IMUs allow us to characterize risk factors post-rehabilitation in elderly fallers, whereas the BBS scores only show changes in overall balance. It is crucial to objectively evaluate the effectiveness of such interventions to reduce future falls and their adverse consequences. Therefore, instrumented balance assessment is recommended since it can provide quantitative and objective measures for clinical outcome evaluations.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.442

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.171
GPT teacher head0.487
Teacher spread0.316 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGerontologySame topicBalance, Gait, and Falls PreventionFrench-language works237,207