A Functional Testing Approach To Geriatric Rehab T. Daniel Walters - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

a functional testing approach to geriatric rehab
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

A Functional Testing Approach To Geriatric Rehab T. Daniel Walters - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

A Functional Testing Approach To Geriatric Rehab T. Daniel Walters PT, DPT, GCS 1 Introduction Prevalence of the older adult population 50% case load are patients age 65 years and older More than 37 million American adults are age 65


slide-1
SLIDE 1

A Functional Testing Approach To Geriatric Rehab

  • T. Daniel Walters PT, DPT, GCS

1

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Introduction

  • Prevalence of the older adult population
  • 50% case load are patients age 65 years and older
  • More than 37 million American adults are age 65 or
  • lder, about 13% of the general population.
  • By 2030 this number is expected to rise to 20% due to

baby boomers, declining birth/death rates.

  • Of the 37 million aged 65 and older, 10% are over age

85

2

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Introduction

  • Prevalence of falls
  • 30% age 65 and 40% age 75 will have a fall each

year

  • Most common mechanism of injury and leading

cause of death from injury in people age 65 and

  • ver
  • 1 year mortality rate following hip fracture is about

25%

  • 43‐60 billion in annual healthcare costs
  • Fun Fact‐ Vitamin D may help prevent falls and

fractures in older adults

3

slide-4
SLIDE 4

Functional decline as defined by Schwartz

Fun Functional Frail Failure

Do what you want, when you want, for as long as you want Some degree of mobility disability Requiring help with ADLs Complete dependence 4

slide-5
SLIDE 5

Frailty

  • Fried et al proposed criteria for frailty as a syndrome
  • 10 lb. or more of unintentional weight loss in the past year
  • Muscle weakness defined as grip strength <23 lbs. for

females, <32 lbs. for men

  • Walking speed <0.8 m/sec
  • Low level of activity equivalent to sitting or lying down

majority of the day

  • Self reported exhaustion 3 or more days per week
  • Meeting 3 of the above criteria is considered frail
  • May better indicate magnitude of need and support

functional markers and goals

5

slide-6
SLIDE 6

Common Age Related and Disease Processes

  • Aging process
  • ↓ muscle mass (Sarcopenia)
  • ↓ bone mass
  • ↓ In max HR, VO2 max, SA

node cells and contractility of vascular walls.

  • ↑ in vascular ssue sffness
  • Slowed memory processes, ↓

abstract thought, mild decline in executive function

  • After age 60, all physiological

systems decline at a similar rate, 20‐30% per decade

  • Disease process
  • Cachexia
  • Osteoarthritis
  • Osteoporosis
  • Proximal femur, distal radius,

vertebral bodies effected first

  • Heart Disease and Heart

Failure

  • Atrial fibrillation
  • Cerebrovascular accident
  • Hypertension
  • Dementia
  • Cognitive reserve may

mask symptoms

6

slide-7
SLIDE 7

Factoring In Medications

  • With age comes the potential for disease processes

and need for medications, with possible multiple prescribers and drug interactions

  • Older adults are 13% of the population using 34% of all

prescription drugs

  • www.drugs.com
  • It’s recommended as best practice that we perform

a medication screening on all patients in every setting

  • http://www.moveforwardpt.com/ChoosePT/Toolkit
  • Campaign against opioids
  • America consumes 99% of the world’s hydrocodone

7

slide-8
SLIDE 8

Pop Quiz!

  • Metoprolol (beta blocker)
  • Percocet (narcotic)
  • Furosemide (diuretic)
  • Amitriptyline (Tri cyclic Anti‐depressant)
  • NSAIDs
  • Acetaminophen
  • Prednisone prolonged use (glucocorticoid)
  • Ambien, Diazepam and other Benzodiazepines

(sedative‐hypnotics)

  • Spiriva (anticholinergic, for COPD)
  • Decongestants
  • Statins
  • Constipation
  • Orthostatic hypotension
  • Fatigue and weakness
  • Dizziness
  • Confusion
  • Anterograde amnesia
  • Impaired bone healing
  • Liver toxicity
  • Respiratory depression
  • Muscle and bone catabolism
  • Dry mouth
  • Tachycardia
  • Hypertension
  • Muscle pain

8

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Quantitative Drug Index (QDI)

  • Drug A‐ dizziness= 1
  • Drug B‐ drowsiness, lethargy=2
  • QDI total= 3
  • Low impact drug group <0
  • High impact drug group>0

9

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Case Study 1

  • 77 year old female referred to therapy with a diagnosis of back

pain rated 6/10 on numeric scale located in mid‐thoracic region that started 2 weeks ago and the pain pattern appears

  • inconsistent. Reports taking narcotic for pain every 4‐6 hours,

Metoprolol, and Fosamax. Client recently had an increase in housekeeping duties due to her husband being hospitalized for pneumonia however her ability to participate in these ADLs effectively and safely is decreasing due to pain and fatigue. History of osteoarthritis in bilateral hips, HTN and

  • steoporosis. Previously able to ambulate community

distances to essential places such as the grocery store without an AD, pain or reports of fatigue. Currently the patient reports increased pain with household ambulation and intermittent use of 4 WW.

10

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Home Environment: Bang for the Buck

  • In a study published in sept. 2014, researchers at the

university of Otago in New Zealand discovered that low cost ($300‐600) home modifications reduced injury rates caused by falls at home per year by 26%.

  • Handrails for outdoor and indoor stairs
  • high visibility slip resistant edging for outdoor stairs
  • grab bars for bathroom and toilet
  • adequate lighting
  • repairing lifted edges of carpets and mats
  • non slip bathmats
  • slip resistant surfacing for outdoor surfaces such as decks
  • window catches repairs.

11

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Screening for Vertebral Compression Fractures

  • Osteoporosis and vertebral compression fractures

(VCF)

  • Wall‐occiput test
  • Distance of greater than 7 cm between occipital prominence

and the wall can accurately rule in thoracic VCF

  • sensitivity is relatively low, unable to effectively rule out VCF

with distances less than 7 cm

  • Rib‐pelvis distance test
  • A distance of less than 2 fingerbreadths between inferior

margin of ribs and superior surface of mid axillary pelvic line indicates further evaluation required.

  • A distance greater than 2 fingerbreadths can accurately rule
  • ut lumbar VCF
  • Positive findings may indicate need to refer out for

further testing (DEXA scan)

12

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Osteoporosis VCF Detection Algorithm

  • Age > 52 years
  • No presence of leg pain
  • Body Mass Index < 22
  • Does not exercise

regularly

  • Female gender
  • 2/5 or less helps rule out

OVCF with sensitivity of 95%

  • 4/5 or more helps rule in

OVCF with specificity of 96%

  • Anywhere from 67‐80%
  • f OVCF’s are

asymptomatic or have inconsistent pain patterns

  • Early detection can help

limit future morbidity

13

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Sensitivity Vs. Specificity

  • Sensitivity
  • Helps rule out disease

when the test is negative

  • The higher the sensitivity,

the better the test is at identifying true positives and limiting false negatives

  • “Snout”
  • Specificity
  • Helps rule in disease

when the test is positive

  • The higher the specificity,

the more certainty you have that a positive result confirms disease presence, limiting false positives

  • “Spin”

14

slide-15
SLIDE 15

Likelihood Ratios

  • LR+ corresponds to the clinical concept of "ruling‐in

disease"

  • LR‐ corresponds to the clinical concept of "ruling‐
  • ut disease“
  • LR > 1 indicates test result is associated with

disease

  • LR < 1 is associated with absence of disease
  • Helps establish multiple cut points such as level of

fall risk (low, medium, high)

15

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Floor Vs. Ceiling Effects

  • Floor Effect
  • occurs when a measure’s

lowest score is unable to assess a patient’s level of ability.

  • For example a measure that

assesses fall risk may not be sensitive enough to assess low levels of fall risk among

  • lder adults, making it

difficult to rule out risk of falls

  • Ceiling Effect
  • occur when a measure’s

highest score is unable to assess a patient’s level of ability.

  • For example, a patient’s fall

risk score may initially be in range to rule in, but the patient’s ability exceeds the measure's highest score

  • ver time, making it

difficult to determine whether or not the patient continues to be at risk

16

slide-17
SLIDE 17

MDC Vs. MCID

  • MDC= minimal

detectable change

  • the minimum amount
  • f change in a patient's

score that ensures the change isn't the result

  • f measurement error
  • MCID= Minimal

clinically important difference

  • smallest amount
  • f change in an
  • utcome considered

statistically significant

  • minimum amount of

change required for the patient to feel a difference

17

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Clinically Practical Functional Tests for Performance

  • VIDEO

18

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Gait Speed: The Sixth Vital Sign

  • Timed walk over a set distance 4m, 6m, 10m with space to accelerate. Preferred or

fast walking speed. Perform 3 trials and take the average

  • Slower gait speed has been shown to be the single best predictor of decline in health

and function.

  • Predicts mortality, mobility disability, ADL disability, risk for hospitalization, risk for

falls

  • Research also suggests gait speed as the best predictor of stair climbing ability
  • Normal gait speeds range 1.2‐1.4 m/sec (1m= 3.3 ft)
  • Approximate time to cross the street
  • MCID= 0.1 m/sec
  • Functional gait speeds
  • 0.5 m/sec= household ambulatory at risk for falls
  • 0.8 m/sec= community ambulatory
  • < 1.0 m/sec= risk for health related functional decline, > 1.0 m/sec= less likely for

adverse events

  • <0.6 m/sec indicates likelihood for hospitalization, dependence with ADLs/IADLs

19

slide-20
SLIDE 20

3‐m Backwards Walk

  • Looked at 1 year retrospective falls in retirement

community residents without neurological deficits

  • <3.0 sec.= unlikely
  • >4.5 sec= very likely
  • Compared to TUG, 5x sit to stand, 4 square step

test

  • 3MBW demonstrated similar or better diagnostic

accuracy for falls

20

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Heel Rise Test

  • Proposed by Lunsford and Perry to test

plantarflexion strength

  • Plantarflexion plays an important role in gait

propulsion, use as an adjunct with gait speed test

  • Unable to test plantarflexion strength with manual

muscle testing secondary to the short moment arm

  • The patient places his/her hands on the examiner’s

shoulders or hands and should not push down. Test is stopped if ROM is < 50%, knee flexed or balance is lost

  • Age related normative values:
  • Age 21‐40 men 22.1, women 16.1
  • Age 41‐60 men 12.1 reps, women 9.3 reps
  • Age 61‐80 men 4.1 reps, women 2.7 reps

21

slide-22
SLIDE 22

Strength: Chair Stand Test

  • Tests leg strength: includes 30 sec chair stand and 5x chair stand
  • LE dynamometry has been normalized with body weight to

validate the chair stand test as an objective measure of strength

  • Eriksrud and Bohanon found that the strength needed to rise

from a chair without UE support was 40‐47% of a person’s body weight

  • Test continues if patient pushes off chair with thighs (can still

compare with norms)

  • Hand use= test cannot be compared with norms

30 sec chair stand age related norms:

Age 60‐69: women 11‐17, men 12‐19 Age 70‐79: women 10‐15, men 11‐17 Age 80‐89: women 8‐14, men 8‐15 Age > 90: women 4‐11, men 7‐12 < 8 repetitions indicates risk for mobility disability and frailty

5x chair stand age related norm’s for males and females

Age 60‐69: 11.4 sec Age 70‐79: 12.6 sec Age 80‐89: 14.8 sec > 15 sec is associated with fall risk and frailty

22

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Timed Up and Go (TUG)

  • Widely used validated assessment tool, easy to administer
  • Sit in standard armchair with back against chair, walking distance

approximately 10 ft.

  • TUG test may be too low level for some higher functioning older

adults

  • Measures fall risk
  • High sensitivity (87%) and specificity (87%)
  • Scoring
  • A score of > 13.5 sec associated with high fall risk with a correct

fall prediction rate of 90%

  • A score of > 30 sec indicates significant difficulty with ADLs,

predictive of requiring ambulation device

  • Age related norms
  • Age 60‐69= 9.0 sec
  • Age 70‐79= 10.2 sec
  • Age 80‐89= 12.7 sec

23

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Strength Vs. Power

  • Strength
  • Leg strength has been

identified as the most important predictor of subsequent institutionalization, more than disease and physiological indicators

  • Power
  • power (velocity x load)

as opposed to strength may be a better indicator of ADL dependence.

  • Knee ext. power better

predictor of performance of physical tasks than knee ext. strength in OA.

24

slide-25
SLIDE 25

Stair Climb Test

  • Use as a funconal marker for physical acvity, frail →

functional

  • Aids in identifying appropriate level of activity and establishing

realistic goals

  • The ability to climb 10 stairs:
  • In <10 sec without rails indicates independent level of physical

activity to do whatever one wants

  • In 10‐30 sec with or without rails indicates mobility disability

requiring patient to make choices on activity participation

  • In 30‐50 sec with rails indicates help needed with ADLs
  • Mean gait speed of 1.0 m/sec predictive of mean stair

climb of 1.3 steps per second, considered normal for healthy older adults

  • Aids in discharge planning and recommending appropriate

living environments 25

slide-26
SLIDE 26

Sitting‐Rising Test (SRT)

  • The sitting rising test is a remarkable predictor of all‐cause mortality in
  • lder adults.
  • Ability to sit and rise from the floor unsupported
  • Tests both strength and flexibility
  • Speed of task is not a factor however speed may be a functional marker for frailty

if >30 sec

  • Scored on a 10 point scale
  • 5 points awarded for sitting unsupported, 5 more for standing unsupported
  • Subtract 1 point for each hand, knee, hand on knee, side of leg or forearm used in

each task

  • Subtract 0.5 point for a loss of balance
  • Score interpretation (6 year mortality rate) with a 95% CI
  • >8= normal
  • 6‐7.5= 2x increase
  • 3.5‐5.5= 4x increase
  • < 3= 6x increase
  • Use as a functional marker for musculoskeletal fitness and motivation

to get back in shape! 26

slide-27
SLIDE 27

SRT Video

27

slide-28
SLIDE 28

Floor Transfer Test

May serve as an important measure of safety and a reliable indicator of one's ability to age in place.

28

slide-29
SLIDE 29

Single Leg Stance Test

  • Examines strength, fall risk, postural control
  • Performed with arms crossed over chest, lifted leg

not touching other leg.

  • Sensitivity 95% and specificity of 58% in separating

fallers vs. non fallers, suggesting older adults that can SLS for at least 30 sec are low risk (rule out), however SLS < 30 sec cannot adequately provide risk of falling info (cannot rule in)

  • SLS < 5 sec= Increased risk of injurious fall
  • Age related norms
  • Age 60‐69= 26.9 sec
  • Age 70‐79= 15.0 sec
  • Age 80‐89= 6.2 sec

29

slide-30
SLIDE 30

360 Degree Turn Test

  • Ability to turn as quickly and safely in a full circle
  • Examines dynamic balance
  • Normal= < 3.8 sec
  • A score of > 3.8 sec indicates ↑ rate of dependence
  • Excellent test‐retest reliability
  • 42% age 55‐69
  • 60% age > 70
  • Excellent convergent validity with gait speed

30

slide-31
SLIDE 31

Functional Reach Test

  • Examines dynamic balance and is a good indicator
  • f household ADL participation
  • Measure from 3rd metacarpal, 3 trials averaged
  • Scoring and interpretation:
  • A reach of > 10 inches= Normal, low fall risk
  • 6‐10 inches= risk of falling 2x greater than normal
  • <6 inches= risk of falling 4x greater than normal and is

predictive of having a fall within the next 6 months

  • Age related norms
  • Age 41‐69: men 15 inches, women 14 inches
  • Age 70‐87: men 13 inches, women 10.5 inches

31

slide-32
SLIDE 32

Upper Extremity Strength

  • Hand held dynamometry or grip strength
  • Also a good indicator of overall functional strength
  • On average grip strength decreases 8‐9% per

decade after age 50 without factoring in chronic diseases.

  • 16kg for females and 28.7kg for males= Correlated

with lower scores on Barthel Index (BI)

  • BI evaluates 10 basic activities of daily living

items: feeding, transferring, grooming, toileting, bathing, ambulation, stair climbing, dressing, bowel control, and bladder control

32

slide-33
SLIDE 33

Grip Strength Values

1 Chronic Disease (CD) Male Left Kg Male Right Kg Female Left Kg Female Right Kg 50‐59y 41.3 45.7 25.0 27.5 60‐69y 38.9 42.1 22.6 25.2 70‐79y 34.0 37.2 19.9 22.1 >80y 29.2 31.4 16.2 18.2 2 CD 50‐59y 40.0 44.3 24.3 26.9 60‐69y 38.1 41.5 22.9 25.4 70‐79y 33.6 36.5 20.0 22.1 >80y 27.3 29.7 15.2 16.8 >3 CD 50‐59y 39.0 41.8 22.5 25.5 60‐69y 36.5 38.6 21.2 23.9 70‐79y 32.2 34.8 18.4 20.7 >80y 25.3 28.1 15.7 17.6

33

slide-34
SLIDE 34

Case Study 2

  • The client is an 80 yo male referred to therapy after having a fall 3

days ago with no resulting serious injury or fractures. Client fell while getting out of the tub after taking a standing shower. PMH includes generalized OA effecting multiple joints, lumbar spinal stenosis with loss of protective sensation on plantar aspect bilateral feet, HTN and cigarette smoker for 50 years ½ pack per day, COPD. Patient reports driving to the bank yesterday and ambulates with a straight cane when outside the home. 1 flight of stairs in the home, currently no report of pain but does complain of intermittent radicular pain in lower extremities after prolonged periods of standing. Medications include aspirin 81mg, Tylenol arthritis as needed for pain, multi‐ vitamin, Spiriva.

  • Outcomes
  • Gait speed 0.6 m/sec
  • 30 sec chair stand 5 reps
  • Heel rises unable to perform
  • 360 degree turn 5 sec
  • Single leg stance 5 sec on left, 0 on right

34

slide-35
SLIDE 35

6 Minute Walk Test

  • Great for measuring aerobic fitness for community

ambulation and correlates well with other performance measures such as gait speed

  • Normative data by Gibbons et al
  • Healthy subjects 60‐80 years old
  • Men 688.8 +/‐ 89.9m
  • Women 584 +/‐ 53m
  • Normative data by Lusardi et al including AD use
  • Age 60‐69 420.4 +/‐ 105.4m
  • Age 80‐89 292.1 +/‐ 112.7m
  • Normative data by Steffen et al without AD use
  • Age 60‐69 males 572 +/‐ 92m females 538 +/‐ 92m
  • Age 70‐79 males 527 +/‐ 85m females 471 +/‐ 75 m
  • Age 80‐89 males 417 +‐ 73m females 392 +/‐ 85m
  • MCID is 20m change, 50m change is substantial
  • <200m= Increased likelihood for hospitalization

35

slide-36
SLIDE 36

400 Meter Walk Test

  • Similar to the 6 minute walk test
  • Focuses on the defined distance instead of defined

time, which may prove more beneficial for certain patients to help pace themselves

  • Frequent stops, CHF with peripheral vascular deficits
  • 4m gait speed is highly predictive of ability to

perform 400 MWT

  • 400 M in 6 min = 1.1 m/sec gait speed
  • Age related normative data is similar to 6 min walk

test

36

slide-37
SLIDE 37

Modified RPE

  • Indicated with Beta blocker use due to the blunting

effects on HR

Number Description % Threshold Nothing at all 50‐60% 1 Very light, Gentle walk 2 Fairly light 60‐70% (aerobic) 3 Moderate, steady pace 4 Somewhat hard, brisk walk with conversation 70‐80% (aerobic) 5 Starting to breath hard 80‐90% (anaerobic) 6 getting uncomfortable 7 Very hard breathing, unable to talk and keep pace 90‐100% (VO2max) 8 uncomfortable 9 Extremely hard 10 Maximum exertion, can’t continue

37

slide-38
SLIDE 38

Labs

38

slide-39
SLIDE 39

Case Study 3

  • The client is a 70 yo male referred to therapy after a

recent hospital stay for pneumonia. Previously ambulating community distances to essential places without AD, currently the patient is able to ambulate 400m during 6 min walk with mRPE ranging from 3‐5 but presents with observed lateropulsion, staggering with direction changes using a reaching strategy to

  • recover. History of DM type 2, HTN, enlarged prostate,
  • asthma. Meds include metoprolol, metformin,

Flomax, furosemide, potassium chloride, Advair

  • diskus. When asked about hydration and nutrition

the client reports only drinking 1 bottle of water daily.

39

slide-40
SLIDE 40

mCTSIB

  • Clinical test on sensory interaction and

balance

  • Attempts to quantify postural control
  • Assesses sensory integration, not

effective at measuring change over time

  • 4 conditions performed for 30 sec max.
  • Research has shown that position of the

feet nor the footwear influence score on mCTSIB

  • Head shakes during test may improve

sensitivity to help rule out

  • May help identify vestibular deficits
  • Video

40

slide-41
SLIDE 41

Identifying Vestibular Deficits

  • Oculomotor exam
  • Central Signs
  • 4 D’s: dysmetria, diplopia,

dysarthria, dysphagia

  • Pure vertical nystagmus, abnormal

smooth pursuit, persistent ocular tilt reaction

  • VBI screen
  • Visual dysfunction, nausea
  • Head thrust test
  • Tests vestibulo‐ocular reflex (VOR)
  • Deficits in VOR may result in ↓

visual acuity, sensory integration and response to COG perturbation

  • Video

41

slide-42
SLIDE 42

Dynamic Gait index

  • Useful with vestibular or suspected vestibular

disorders

  • Albeit with ceiling effects
  • Provide further insight into impairments and guide

interventions

  • Moderate fall risk prediction using cutoff score of 19
  • Sensitivity 59% and specificity 64% for elderly
  • Sensitivity 67% and specificity 86% for community

dwelling older adults

  • MCID= 2 points for a score <21/24

42

slide-43
SLIDE 43

Functional Gait Assessment (FGA)

  • Item 7 “Step around obstacles” eliminated
  • Item 1 accounts for gait speed
  • 3 additional items including:
  • Tandem walking up to 10 steps with arms folded across

chest

  • Walking backwards up to 20 feet
  • Walking with eyes closed up to 20 feet
  • Excellent concurrent validity with DGI
  • <22/30= increased fall risk
  • Sensitivity 85% specificity 86%

43

slide-44
SLIDE 44

4 Square Step Test

  • Examines dynamic standing

balance and multidirectional movements

  • Takes less than 5 min to test
  • Time it takes to step over 4 canes

arranged at 90 degree angles, forward/backward and sideways facing forward the entire time

  • >15 sec= cutoff score in predicting

2 or more falls

  • Sensitivity 89%
  • Specificity 85%

44

  • Video
slide-45
SLIDE 45

Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB)

  • Good predictor of mobility disability
  • Rhomberg, semi tandem, tandem, gait speed, 5x

chair stand

  • Score of 10 or less= high risk of mobility disability
  • Scores range from 0‐12, 10 sec milestones for the 3

balance conditions

score Rhomberg Semi tandem Tandem Gait speed 5x sit to stand 0‐9 sec unable unable 1 <10 sec < 0.43 m/sec >16.7 sec 2 0‐2 sec 0.44‐ 0.60 m/sec 13.7‐16.6 sec 3 3‐9 sec 0.61‐ 0.76 m/sec 11.2‐ 13.6 sec 4 10 sec > 0.76 m/sec <11.1 sec

45

slide-46
SLIDE 46

Tinetti

  • Measures gait quality, balance ability and fall risk
  • Minimal detectable change= 4 points
  • MCID not established
  • Max score of 28
  • < 19 indicates high risk for falls
  • 19‐23 indicates risk for falls
  • Sensitivity and specificity for older adults 85% and 56%

respectively with cutoff of 21

  • Sensitivity and specificity for frail elderly 83% and 72%

respectively with cutoff of 11

  • Normative data
  • Age 65‐79 males and females score 26 and 25 respectively
  • Over 80 males and females score 23 and 17 respectively

46

slide-47
SLIDE 47

MAHC‐10

  • Validated assessment tool to assess fall risk in non‐

ambulatory patients

  • Qualifies as a multifactorial fall risk assessment
  • 10 items scored 1 point per item, a score of > 4 indicates

risk for falling

  • Age 65+
  • Diagnoses (3 or more coexisting)
  • Prior history of falls within 3 months
  • Incontinence
  • Impaired functional mobility
  • Environmental hazards
  • Polypharmacy (4 or prescriptions – any type)
  • Pain affecting level of function
  • Cognitive impairment
  • Visual impairment

47

slide-48
SLIDE 48

Activities Balance Confidence Scale (ABC)

  • 16 item self measure of daily activities, rating each
  • ne on a scale from 0‐100%
  • Score= all 16 item % ratings divided by 16.
  • Score < 67 indicates risk for falling with positive

prediction value of 84%

  • Score < 50 indicates low physical functioning
  • Score 50‐80 indicates moderate functioning
  • Score > 80 indicates high functioning
  • Excellent correlation between ABC score and Berg

Balance Scale (r = 0.752, p < 0.01) and between ABC score and TUG (r = 0.698, p < 0.01)

  • Suggests fear of falling is related to falls and balance

ability

48

slide-49
SLIDE 49

Short Form Fall Efficacy Scale‐ International (FES‐I)

  • Consists of 7 items of daily activities rated on a 1‐4

scale from not at all concerned(1) to very concerned(4) with regard to falling while performing that daily activity item

  • Excellent Concurrent validity with ABC scale r= ‐0.84
  • Sensitivity and specificity 59% and 82% respectively

with a cutoff score of >16 for risk of falling

49

slide-50
SLIDE 50

Berg Balance Scale

  • Takes 15‐20 minutes to administer
  • According to the Shumway‐cook model, a score of 36
  • r less= 100% chance of falling in the next 6 months
  • Score of less than 45= high risk of falls
  • Score of greater than 45 cannot confirm a lower risk
  • f falling, therefore a cutoff of 45 should not be used

in assuring

  • Specificity 96% (predicting non‐fallers)
  • Sensitivity 53% (positive prediction of falls)

50

slide-51
SLIDE 51

7 item BBS‐ 3P

  • Items 1, 6, 8, 9, 10, 13, 14
  • 3 level scale instead of five
  • 0‐2‐4 Score
  • 28 points total
  • <23 indicates increased risk for falling
  • Excellent convergent validity with Barthel Index
  • Excellent concurrent validity with BBS
  • Best used in fast paced settings with strongest data

application in acute care stroke

51

slide-52
SLIDE 52

Manual Muscle Testing

  • Measurement error in MMT may be as high as 50%
  • An MMT graded above a 3/5 is not considered valid
  • A 5/5 grade spans a force of 76‐675 Newtons
  • A 4/5 grade spans a force of 55.6‐261.1 Newtons
  • MMT clinically practical application is limited

especially when considering strength requirements for functional mobility tasks

  • Dynamometry and max repetition tests provide

more objective and practical measures

52

slide-53
SLIDE 53

Labs

53

slide-54
SLIDE 54

Exercise Prescription

  • Threshold stimulus= at least 60% of 1 rep max is needed

for muscle adaptation and also applies to cardiovascular training, equating to 3‐4 mRPE scale

  • For frail individuals with low strength reserve, ADL tasks may be

sufficient to reach threshold stimulus, enabling combination of motor learning and strengthening

  • Specificity: muscle strength is gained by how it’s trained.
  • Open chain exercise does not improve strength in closed chain

exercise and vice versa

6 weeks

  • True

strength response 12‐16 weeks

  • Long lasting

gains 6 months

  • Neurological

conditions

54

slide-55
SLIDE 55

Exercise Prescription

  • Strength
  • Frequency: 2‐3x per week for each major muscle group,

allowing 24‐48 hours rest for each muscle group worked

  • Intensity: optimal training range for muscle adaptation is

60‐80% 1 rep max

  • 60%= 15 reps to fatigue, evidenced by lack of form or

ability to move through full ROM

  • 80%= 10 reps to fatigue. Even greater strength effects

are seen at training intensities of 80% in the very old and frail population

  • Duration: Research suggests 1 set of each exercise at

80% or 10 reps is as effective as 3 sets in achieving

  • ptimal strength gains in the older adult population.

55

slide-56
SLIDE 56

Exercise Prescription

  • Cardiovascular
  • Frequency: 3‐5x per week.

Can be adjusted based on intensity

  • Intensity:
  • 60‐80% x maxHR (220‐age)
  • mRPE subjective report of

3‐4

  • Duration: Ideally 30 minutes

with 5‐10 min periods of warm up and cool down

56

slide-57
SLIDE 57

Exercise Prescription

  • Balance and skill activities
  • Frequency: Daily
  • Intensity: vary workload

between hard= 2‐3 days, moderate= 2‐3 days, low= 1‐2 days to prevent overtraining

  • Duration: 20‐30 minutes of

practice daily

  • Flexibility
  • Frequency: Daily
  • Intensity: based on comfort

level

  • Duration: 4 reps of each stretch

at 1 min. hold is most beneficial for older adults 57

slide-58
SLIDE 58

Case Studies Revisited

58

slide-59
SLIDE 59

Fall Prevention Exercise Programs

59

slide-60
SLIDE 60

Evidence Based Exercise Programming

  • Otago exercise program
  • Designed for frail older adults, community dwelling
  • reduces falls between 35 and 40%
  • Visited 4 times at home over the first 2 months (at weeks

1, 2, 4, and 8) and visited again for a booster session at 6

  • months. participants were telephoned once a month

during the months when no visits were scheduled.

  • The first home visit lasted an hour; all subsequent visits

took about half an hour

  • 17 different Strengthening, balance and stability exercises
  • Frequency of exercises prescribed 3 times a week and to

walk outside the home at least 2 times a week.

  • Evidence is growing for assisted living application

60

slide-61
SLIDE 61

Evidence Based Exercise Programming

  • Swimming has been shown to reduce falls in older

adults

  • According to a study published by the American journal of

epidemiology in September 2014, men over the age of 70 who participate in swimming were 33 % less likely to have a fall compared to other types of physical activity such as walking, stationary bikes and calisthenics.

  • Followed 1700 men over a 4 year time span, comparing the

types of exercise with likelihood of having a fall, nearly 2700 falls occurred.

  • There was no cause‐effect relationship established, could it be

that men with good leg strength and postural control are more likely to participate in swimming?

61

slide-62
SLIDE 62

Evidence Based Exercise Programming

  • Stepping On developed by Wisconsin institute of aging
  • Study participants were age 70 or older community dwelling, fall rate

reduced by 30%

  • Small group sessions to teach fall prevention, facilitated by an OT
  • 7 weekly 2 hour sessions, each session covered a different topic
  • Session 1: Risk appraisal; introducing balance and strength exercises
  • Session 2: Review and practice exercises; how to move safely in the home
  • Session 3: Hazards in and around the home and how to remove or reduce them
  • Session 4: How to move safely in the community; safe footwear and clothing
  • Session 5: Poor vision and fall risk; the benefits of vitamin D, calcium, and hip

protectors

  • Session 6: Medication management; review of exercises; more strategies for

moving safely in the community

  • Session 7: Review of topics covered in program
  • Follow‐up home visit 6 weeks after final session: Review fall prevention

strategies; assist with home adaptations and modifications, if needed

  • Three‐month booster session: Review achievements and how to maintain

motivation

  • requires a PT, an OT, a person trained in road safety for older drivers, a low

vision expert, and a nurse or community pharmacist who can discuss medications

62

slide-63
SLIDE 63

Evidence Based Exercise Programming

  • STEADI falls program through CDC
  • “Stopping elderly accidents, deaths and injuries”
  • Toolkit developed by the CDC providing healthcare

practitioners who treat older adults at risk for falls or who have fallen

  • Educational handouts, referrals, resources,

recommended exercise programs such as tai chi

  • Validated tests include the TUG, 30 sec. chair stand, 4

stage balance test, orthostatic hypotension test

63

slide-64
SLIDE 64

3 keys to Better Documentation

  • 1. Showing medical necessity
  • In addition to your physical examination try to include

modifiers in your assessment to reflect a wider scope of need, for example:

  • Frailty criteria, activity level, environmental challenges
  • PLOF vs. CLOF vs. further rehab potential
  • Objective tests accurate and concise in interpretation, for

example:

  • Gait speed 0.5 m/sec indicating increased risk for hospitalization

and appropriate for household ambulation only

  • 30 sec. chair stand test 3 reps indicating BLE functional strength

deficits and dependence with ADLs

  • DGI 16/24 indicating high risk of falls, sensory integration deficits

and unilateral left vestibular weakness as evidenced by left line

  • f progression deviation validated with head thrust test positive
  • n left

64

slide-65
SLIDE 65

Patient Centered Goals

  • Client will improve gait speed with use of 4ww to 0.7

m/sec in 4 weeks to reduce risk of hospitalization and to 1.0 m/sec in 8 weeks for community ambulation readiness to attend weekly church

  • Client will improve 30 sec. chair stand test to 6 reps in 4

weeks and to 9 reps in 8 weeks for greater BLE functional strength and ADL independence

  • Client will improve DGI to 18/24 in 4 weeks and to 20/24 in

8 weeks to improve sensory integration and reduce risk of falls

  • New research suggests 200m (600 ft.) should be the basis

for community ambulation

  • Recommendation: Set goals and daily note documentation of

ambulation distance within context of a 6MWT or 2MWT; along with essential places or activities 65

slide-66
SLIDE 66

3 Keys to Better Documentation

  • 2. Measuring patient progression
  • Include objective data in every note (VAT or objective test used

related to patient centered goals)

  • Types of exercise and how they apply to outcomes and goals:
  • Chair rises1x15 for BLE functional strength development to improve

ADL participation

  • Verbal cues to facilitate hip extension and gluteal muscle

activation

  • Heel rises 1x20 for plantarflexion strength development to improve

gait speed and stair climbing ability

  • VORx1 for gaze stabilization to improve sensory integration and

reduce line of progression deviation during gait training

  • Response to treatment
  • Vital sign changes, SOB, pain, frequency and duration of rest breaks,

alleviation or exacerbation of symptoms and for how long.

  • Subjective report of participation in more challenging daily

functional activities requiring more strength, postural control to complete. 66

slide-67
SLIDE 67

3 Keys to Better Documentation

  • 3. Real‐world application
  • Acute ($$$$) to Sub‐acute ($$$) to Home health ($$) to

Outpatient ($) to Wellness

  • Communication is key
  • Documentation of consultation between internal and external

providers, patients and caregivers especially with changes in condition

  • Educating our patients/clients/customers
  • Teach‐back methods
  • HEP
  • Patient centered goals and how outcomes empower them
  • The “buy‐in”, feeling the difference, sense of accomplishment
  • Payment models and changes
  • https://data.cms.gov/market‐saturation

67

slide-68
SLIDE 68

THANK YOU!

68