Israel Medical Association Journal

Background: Falls are a common complication in persons with stroke (PwS). Reliable assessment of balance responses to unexpected loss of balance has the potential to identify risk for falls. 

Objectives: To examine inter-observer reliability of balance responses to unannounced surface perturbations in PwS and to explore the concurrent validity of a balance recovery assessment protocol.

Methods: Two observers evaluated balance recovery strategies and fall threshold (a fall into a harness system) in 15 PwS and 15 healthy adults who were exposed to forward, backward, right, and left unannounced surface translations in six increasing intensities while standing. 

Results: Observer agreement was 100% for the fall threshold. Kappa coefficients for step strategies were 0.960–0.988 in PwS and 0.886–0.938 in healthy adults, 0.905–0.988 for arm reactions in PwS and 0.754–0.926 in healthy adults. Significant correlations were found between fall threshold and Berg Balance Scale (r = 0.691), 6-minute walk test (r = 0.599), and fall efficacy scale-international (r= -0.581). 

Conclusions: A trained examiner can reliably classify reactive balance responses to surface perturbations. The high frequency of falls observed in PwS highlights the importance of assessing reactive balance responses to different directions and intensities of surface translations.

Background: Falls while turning are associated with increased risk of hip fracture in older adults. Reliable and clinically valid methods for turn ability assessments are needed.

Objectives: To explore the inter-observer reliability and known group validity of the TURN 180 test.

Methods: We divided 78 independent older adults (mean age 76.6 ± 6.5 years) into three groups: non-fallers, infrequent fallers (1–2 falls per year), and recurrent fallers (> 2 falls per year). Participants underwent performance-based tests: Timed Up and Go (TUG), Performance Oriented Mobility Assessment (POMA), and Berg Balance Scale (BBS). TUG was videotaped for later analysis of the TURN 180 test by two blinded observers.

Results: A significant difference was found in the TURN 180 test parameters among the groups (P < 0.04). TURN 180 was highly correlated with TUG (r = 0.81–0.89, P < 0.001) and BBS (r = -0.704–0.754, P < 0.0001) and moderately with POMA (r = -0.641–0.698, P < 0.0001). The number of steps was found to be the strongest parameter to determine fallers among older adults (specificity 96.3%, sensitivity 40%). Inter-rater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.91–0.96, P < 0.0001) was found to be excellent for the number of steps, time taken to accomplish a turn, and total test score categories.

Conclusions: The TURN 180 test is highly reliable and can identify the older adults who fall. Our results show that the TURN 180 test can serve as a good performance-based examination for research or clinical setting.