Article

Development of the common data base for the FICSIT trials

Department of Health Services, University of Washington, Seattle 98195.
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society (Impact Factor: 4.22). 04/1993; 41(3):297-308. DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1993.tb06708.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The eight FICSIT (Frailty and Injuries: Cooperative Studies of Intervention Techniques) sites test different intervention strategies in selected target groups of older adults. To compare the relative potential of these interventions to reduce frailty and fall-related injuries, all sites share certain descriptive (risk-adjustment) measures and outcome measures. This article describes the shared measures, which are referred to as the FICSIT Common Data Base (CDB). The description is divided into four sections according to the four FICSIT committees responsible for the CDB: (1) psychosocial health and demographic measures; (2) physical health measures; (3) fall-related measures; and (4) cost and cost-effectiveness measures. Because the structure of the FICSIT trial is unusual, the CDB should expedite secondary analyses of various research questions dealing with frailty and falls.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Marcia G Ory, Jul 25, 2014
5 Followers
 · 
282 Views
  • Source
    • "A fall was defined as unintentionally coming to the ground or some lower level, excluding causes such as sustaining a violent blow, loss of consciousness, or sudden onset of paralysis, such as during a stroke or epileptic seizure (Gibson, Andres, Isaacs, Radebaugh, & Wormpetersen, 1987). Neither ''coming to rest against a wall or other structure'' nor ''high-trauma falls (e.g., falling from a ladder) or falling as a consequence of sustaining a violent blow'' were included as falls (Buchner et al., 1993). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of this study was to test the reliability and validity of a preferred-standing test for measuring the risk of falling. The preferred-standing position of elderly fallers and non-fallers and healthy young adults was measured. The maximal BSW was measured. The absolute and relative reliability and discriminant validity were assessed. The expanded timed get-up-and-go test (ETGUG), one-leg stance test (OS), tandem stance (TS), and falls efficacy scale international version (FES-I) were used to determine criterion validity. In total, 146 persons (102 females, 44 males; mean age 55±22 years, range 20-94) were recruited. Forty elderly community dwellers (8 fallers) and 26 young adults were tested twice to determine the test-retest reliability. The BSW showed acceptable test-retest reliability (Intraclass correlation coefficient, ICC2,1=0.77-0.83) and inter-rater reliability (ICC3,1=0.77-0.95) for all groups. The standard error of measurement (SEM) was between 0.77 and 1.87, and the smallest detectable change (SDC) was between 2.14cm and 5.19cm. The Bland-Altman plot revealed no systematic errors. There was significant difference between elderly fallers and non-fallers (F(1/75)=11.951; p=0.001. Spearman's rho coefficient values showed no correlation between the BSW and the ETGUG (-0.17, p=0.47), OLS (-0.04, p=0.65), TS (-0.11, p=0.21), and FES-I (-0.10; p=0.27). Only the BSW was a significant predictor for falling (odds ratio=0.736, p=0.007). The reliability and validity of the BSW protocol were acceptable overall. Prospective studies are warranted to evaluate the predictive value of the BSW for determining the risk of falling.
    Archives of gerontology and geriatrics 05/2013; 57(2). DOI:10.1016/j.archger.2013.04.010 · 1.53 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Slow sit-to-stand times predict disability (Gill, Williams, & Tinetti, 1995; Guralnik, Ferrucci, Simonsick, Salive, & Wallace, 1995). Static balance was assessed by tandem and one-foot stances, which are notably associated with disability (Buchner et al., 1993; Ferrucci et al., 1995; Rossiter-Fornoff, Wolf, Wolfson, & Buchner, 1995). Rikli & Jones' 8-foot upand-go task (TUG) assessed mobility; the short distance made administering the task feasible in homes (Rikli & Jones, 1999). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The Community Long-Term Care (CLTC) program in South Carolina offers services to nursing home eligible persons that allow them to remain at home and receive help with activities of daily living. Variation in the ways potential clients are evaluated often produces inconsistent eligibility determinations. We developed a simple, objective assessment tool to complement CLTC evaluations. A conceptual framework, based on Nagi's model of disablement, was tested on community-dwelling healthy older adults and CLTC clients. Three simple physiologic tasks assessing mobility, functional leg strength, and manual dexterity discriminated between community-dwelling older adults and CLTC clients, classifying them with 80% to 90% accuracy.
    Home Health Care Services Quarterly 11/2009; 28(4):151-71. DOI:10.1080/01621420903579818
  • Source
    • "For the purposes of rehabilitation, the two constructs and their related measuring instruments have the same meaning, provided that the self-efficacy items are expressed in cognitive rather than emotional terms. An advantage of using confidence is that it is a familiar term to most people [7], whereas self-efficacy is the technical term, more familiar in academic circles. The rich body of theory underpinning selfefficacy [4] lends itself to understanding balance confidence and how it can be fostered. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Optimising balance confidence is the goal of rehabilitation among people with mobility problems. The aim of this study was to examine the measurement properties of the CONFbal scale of balance confidence, and comment on its importance in rehabilitation. The 10-item CONFbal scale can also be referred to as a 'falls self-efficacy scale'. STUDY 1: INTERNAL CONSISTENCY AND TEST-RETEST RELIABILITY: CONFbal was administered on two occasions, 1 week apart, using a standardised procedure. Three day centres in south-west London. Older people (n=45, mean age 81 years, standard deviation 7) without any recent change in mobility. The 10 scale items were summed to give an index of balance confidence. Cronbach's alpha for the items was 0.91, with an intra-class correlation coefficient of 0.95. The within-subject standard deviation was 1.145, giving a minimal detectable change of three scale points. This suggests that a change in score of three points following treatment indicates a true difference. STUDY 2: CONCURRENT VALIDITY: Geriatric medical wards in three south-west London hospitals. One hundred and fifty-three people (mean age 81 years, standard deviation 6) completed the test battery prior to discharge. CONFbal; postural instability; perceived unsteadiness; previous mobility; falls in the last 3 years. CONFbal scores (lower scores indicate greater balance confidence) were related to an index of postural instability [correlation coefficient (r)=0.75], previous mobility (r=-0.76) and perceived unsteadiness (r=0.48), but demonstrated a weak relationship with experience of falling (r=0.26). The CONFbal scale demonstrates excellent internal consistency, excellent test-retest reliability, and a small minimal detectable change which allows users to judge whether or not there has been a true clinical improvement. Relationships between the CONFbal scale and other relevant physical and psychological variables support its validity in this population.
    Physiotherapy 07/2009; 95(2):103-9. DOI:10.1016/j.physio.2008.12.004 · 2.11 Impact Factor
Show more