Effect of foot spacing on multi-directional reach test in the normal elderly and elderly hemiplegic patients_West China Medical Journal

Authors：

ZHU Xiaomin ^1,2 ,  ZHANG Tong ¹ , LIU Yuanmin ^1,2 , DU Xuejing ^1,2 , WANG Yanan ^1,2

1. Capital Medical University School of Rehabilitation Medicine, Beijing 100068, P. R. China;
2. Physical Therapy Department, Beijing Bo’ai Hospital, China Rehabilitation Research Center, Beijing 100068, P. R. China;

Corresponding author：

ZHANG Tong, Email: Tom611@126.com

Keywords：

Foot spacing; multi-directional reach test; hemiplegia; elderly; balance

DOI：

10.7507/1002-0179.202101225

Video：

Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Objective To explore the effect of foot spacing on multi-directional reach test in the normal elderly and elderly patients with hemiplegia. Methods From October 2019 to December 2020, 50 eligible elderly hemiplegic cases and 50 normal elderly cases were randomly collected. The multi-directional reach tests with foot spacings of 1.0A, 1.5A and 2.0A (A=horizontal distance between bilateral anterior superior iliac spines) were carried out, and the differences and correlations of the maximum horizontal extension distances in the same direction with the three foot spacings were analyzed. Results The statistical results of the normal elderly group (n=50), the left hemiplegic elderly group (n=28), and the right hemiplegic elderly group (n=22) could be described as follows: the maximum horizontal stretching distances in the same direction of left or right were significantly different among the tests with three foot spacings (P<0.05), and the horizontal stretching distance was the largest when the foot spacing was 1.5A; there was no statistically significant difference in the maximum horizontal extension distances in the same direction of forward or backward among the tests with three foot spacings (P>0.05). In the normal elderly, the Pearson correlation coefficients between the maximum horizontal extension distances with the three foot spacings in the left direction were 0.64-0.71 (P<0.05), and those in the right direction were 0.68-0.75 (P<0.05). In the left hemiplegic elderly, the Pearson correlation coefficients between the maximum horizontal extension distances with the three foot spacings in the left direction were 0.72-0.77 (P<0.05), and those in the right direction were 0.78-0.82 (P<0.05). In the right hemiplegic elderly, the Pearson correlation coefficients between the maximum horizontal extension distances with the three foot spacings in the left direction were 0.62-0.77 (P<0.05), and those in the right direction were 0.72-0.88 (P<0.05). Conclusions The results of the study on the normal elderly, left hemiplegic elderly and right hemiplegic elderly are the same. When the normal elderly and hemiplegic elderly are tested in the community and clinic, the fixed foot spacing should be chosen, and the maximal horizontal extension distance on the coronal plane is significantly affected by different foot spacings.

Citation： ZHU Xiaomin, ZHANG Tong, LIU Yuanmin, DU Xuejing, WANG Yanan. Effect of foot spacing on multi-directional reach test in the normal elderly and elderly hemiplegic patients. West China Medical Journal, 2022, 37(5): 722-727. doi: 10.7507/1002-0179.202101225 Copy

1.	World Health Organization. WHO global report on falls prevention in older age. Switzerland: WHO Press. (2018-01-16)[2020-09-27]. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/falls.
2.	Smee DJ, Berry HL, Anson JM, et al. The relationship between subjective falls-risk assessment tools and functional, health-related, and body composition characteristics. J Appl Gerontol, 2017, 36(2): 156-172.
3.	谭敏, 胡秀英, 刘祚燕. 老年人平衡功能评估与训练研究新进展. 华西医学, 2019, 34(1): 86-90.
4.	Newton RA. Validity of the multi-directional reach test: a practical measure for limits of stability in older adults. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci, 2001, 56(4): 248-252.
5.	Takahashi T, Ishida K, Yamamoto H, et al. Modification of the functional reach test: analysis of lateral and anterior functional reach in community-dwelling older people. Arch Gerontol Geriatr, 2006, 42(2): 167-173.
6.	Hwang WJ, Kim JH, Jeon SH, et al. Maximal lateral reaching distance on the affected side using the multi-directional reach test in persons with stroke. J Phys Ther Sci, 2015, 27(9): 2713-2715.
7.	Shahtahmassebi B, Hebert JJ, Hecimovich M, et al. Trunk exercise training improves muscle size, strength, and function in older adults: a randomized controlled trial. Scand J Med Sci Sports, 2019, 29(7): 980-991.
8.	Lee KY, Hui-Chan CW, Tsang WW. Reliability and validity of the sequential weight-shifting test: a new functional approach to the assessment of the sitting balance of older adults. J Phys Ther Sci, 2016, 28(12): 3444-3450.
9.	Katz-Leurer M, Fisher I, Neeb M, et al. Reliability and validity of the modified functional reach test at the sub-acute stage post-stroke. Disabil Rehabil, 2009, 31(3): 243-248.
10.	Tantisuwat A, Chamonchant D, Boonyong S. Multi-directional reach test: an investigation of the limits of stability of people aged between 20-79 years. J Phys Ther Sci, 2014, 26(6): 877-880.
11.	Tedla JS, Asiri F, Alshahrani MS, et al. Reference values of functional and lateral reach test among the young Saudi population: their psychometric properties and correlation with anthropometric parameters. Med Sci Monit, 2019, 25: 5683-5689.
12.	Sharma K, Samuel AJ, Midha D, et al. Multi-directional reach test in South Asian children: normative reference scores from 5 year to 12 years old. Homo, 2018, 69(1/2): 62-69.
13.	Yuksel E, Ozcan KB, Nalbant A, et al. Functional reach and lateral reach tests in Turkish children. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr, 2017, 37(4): 389-398.
14.	中华医学会神经病学分会, 中华医学会神经病学分会脑血管病学组. 中国急性缺血性脑卒中诊治指南 2018. 中华神经科杂志, 2018, 51(9): 666-682.
15.	中华医学会神经病学分会, 中华医学会神经病学分会脑血管病学组. 中国脑出血诊治指南(2014). 中华神经科杂志, 2015, 48(6): 435-444.
16.	恽晓平. 康复疗法评定学. 北京: 华夏出版社, 2005: 385-386.
17.	周俊, 杨叶萍, 胡兰燕, 等. Berg 量表在养老机构中的应用. 实用临床护理学电子杂志, 2018, 3(50): 8-9.
18.	Bingham JT, Choi JT, Ting LH. Stability in a frontal plane model of balance requires coupled changes to postural configuration and neural feedback control. J Neurophysiol, 2011, 106(1): 437-448.
19.	Martins EF, De Menezes LT, De Sousa PH, et al. Reliability of the functional reach test and the influence of anthropometric characteristics on test results in subjects with hemiparesis. NeuroRehabilitation, 2012, 31(2): 161-169.
20.	Duncan PW, Weiner DK, Chandler J, et al. Functional reach: a new clinical measure of balance. J Gerontol, 1990, 45(6): M192-M197.
21.	Kage H, Okuda M, Nakamura I, et al. Measuring methods for functional reach test: comparison of 1-arm reach and 2-arm reach. Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 2009, 90(12): 2103-2107.
22.	Tanaka R, Ishikawa Y, Yamasaki T, et al. Accuracy of classifying the movement strategy in the functional reach test using a markerless motion capture system. J Med Eng Technol, 2019, 43(2): 133-138.
23.	Mancini M, Rocchi L, Horak FB, et al. Effects of Parkinson’s disease and levodopa on functional limits of stability. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon), 2008, 23(4): 450-458.
24.	Park SH. Assessment of weight shift direction in chronic stroke patients. Osong Public Health Res Perspect, 2018, 9(3): 118-121.
25.	Scrivens JE, Deweerth SP, Ting LH. A robotic device for understanding neuromechanical interactions during standing balance control. Bioinspir Biomim, 2008, 3(2): 026002.
26.	Macpherson JM, Fung J, Jacobs R. Postural orientation, equilibrium, and the spinal cord. Adv Neurol, 1997, 72: 227-232.
27.	Torres-Oviedo G, Ting LH. Subject-specific muscle synergies in human balance control are consistent across different biomechanical contexts. J Neurophysiol, 2010, 103(6): 3084-3098.
28.	Mian OS, Day BL. Violation of the craniocentricity principle for vestibularly evoked balance responses under conditions of anisotropic stability. J Neurosci, 2014, 34(22): 7696-7703.
29.	Goodworth AD, Mellodge P, Peterka RJ. Stance width changes how sensory feedback is used for multisegmental balance control. J Neurophysiol, 2014, 112(3): 525-542.
30.	Horak FB, Dimitrova D, Nutt JG. Direction-specific postural instability in subjects with Parkinson’s disease. Exp Neurol, 2005, 193(2): 504-521.
31.	Swanenburg J, De Bruin ED, Uebelhart D, et al. Falls prediction in elderly people: a 1-year prospective study. Gait Posture, 2010, 31(3): 317-321.

1. World Health Organization. WHO global report on falls prevention in older age. Switzerland: WHO Press. (2018-01-16)[2020-09-27]. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/falls.
2. Smee DJ, Berry HL, Anson JM, et al. The relationship between subjective falls-risk assessment tools and functional, health-related, and body composition characteristics. J Appl Gerontol, 2017, 36(2): 156-172.
3. 谭敏, 胡秀英, 刘祚燕. 老年人平衡功能评估与训练研究新进展. 华西医学, 2019, 34(1): 86-90.
4. Newton RA. Validity of the multi-directional reach test: a practical measure for limits of stability in older adults. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci, 2001, 56(4): 248-252.
5. Takahashi T, Ishida K, Yamamoto H, et al. Modification of the functional reach test: analysis of lateral and anterior functional reach in community-dwelling older people. Arch Gerontol Geriatr, 2006, 42(2): 167-173.
6. Hwang WJ, Kim JH, Jeon SH, et al. Maximal lateral reaching distance on the affected side using the multi-directional reach test in persons with stroke. J Phys Ther Sci, 2015, 27(9): 2713-2715.
7. Shahtahmassebi B, Hebert JJ, Hecimovich M, et al. Trunk exercise training improves muscle size, strength, and function in older adults: a randomized controlled trial. Scand J Med Sci Sports, 2019, 29(7): 980-991.
8. Lee KY, Hui-Chan CW, Tsang WW. Reliability and validity of the sequential weight-shifting test: a new functional approach to the assessment of the sitting balance of older adults. J Phys Ther Sci, 2016, 28(12): 3444-3450.
9. Katz-Leurer M, Fisher I, Neeb M, et al. Reliability and validity of the modified functional reach test at the sub-acute stage post-stroke. Disabil Rehabil, 2009, 31(3): 243-248.
10. Tantisuwat A, Chamonchant D, Boonyong S. Multi-directional reach test: an investigation of the limits of stability of people aged between 20-79 years. J Phys Ther Sci, 2014, 26(6): 877-880.
11. Tedla JS, Asiri F, Alshahrani MS, et al. Reference values of functional and lateral reach test among the young Saudi population: their psychometric properties and correlation with anthropometric parameters. Med Sci Monit, 2019, 25: 5683-5689.
12. Sharma K, Samuel AJ, Midha D, et al. Multi-directional reach test in South Asian children: normative reference scores from 5 year to 12 years old. Homo, 2018, 69(1/2): 62-69.
13. Yuksel E, Ozcan KB, Nalbant A, et al. Functional reach and lateral reach tests in Turkish children. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr, 2017, 37(4): 389-398.
14. 中华医学会神经病学分会, 中华医学会神经病学分会脑血管病学组. 中国急性缺血性脑卒中诊治指南 2018. 中华神经科杂志, 2018, 51(9): 666-682.
15. 中华医学会神经病学分会, 中华医学会神经病学分会脑血管病学组. 中国脑出血诊治指南(2014). 中华神经科杂志, 2015, 48(6): 435-444.
16. 恽晓平. 康复疗法评定学. 北京: 华夏出版社, 2005: 385-386.
17. 周俊, 杨叶萍, 胡兰燕, 等. Berg 量表在养老机构中的应用. 实用临床护理学电子杂志, 2018, 3(50): 8-9.
18. Bingham JT, Choi JT, Ting LH. Stability in a frontal plane model of balance requires coupled changes to postural configuration and neural feedback control. J Neurophysiol, 2011, 106(1): 437-448.
19. Martins EF, De Menezes LT, De Sousa PH, et al. Reliability of the functional reach test and the influence of anthropometric characteristics on test results in subjects with hemiparesis. NeuroRehabilitation, 2012, 31(2): 161-169.
20. Duncan PW, Weiner DK, Chandler J, et al. Functional reach: a new clinical measure of balance. J Gerontol, 1990, 45(6): M192-M197.
21. Kage H, Okuda M, Nakamura I, et al. Measuring methods for functional reach test: comparison of 1-arm reach and 2-arm reach. Arch Phys Med Rehabil, 2009, 90(12): 2103-2107.
22. Tanaka R, Ishikawa Y, Yamasaki T, et al. Accuracy of classifying the movement strategy in the functional reach test using a markerless motion capture system. J Med Eng Technol, 2019, 43(2): 133-138.
23. Mancini M, Rocchi L, Horak FB, et al. Effects of Parkinson’s disease and levodopa on functional limits of stability. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon), 2008, 23(4): 450-458.
24. Park SH. Assessment of weight shift direction in chronic stroke patients. Osong Public Health Res Perspect, 2018, 9(3): 118-121.
25. Scrivens JE, Deweerth SP, Ting LH. A robotic device for understanding neuromechanical interactions during standing balance control. Bioinspir Biomim, 2008, 3(2): 026002.
26. Macpherson JM, Fung J, Jacobs R. Postural orientation, equilibrium, and the spinal cord. Adv Neurol, 1997, 72: 227-232.
27. Torres-Oviedo G, Ting LH. Subject-specific muscle synergies in human balance control are consistent across different biomechanical contexts. J Neurophysiol, 2010, 103(6): 3084-3098.
28. Mian OS, Day BL. Violation of the craniocentricity principle for vestibularly evoked balance responses under conditions of anisotropic stability. J Neurosci, 2014, 34(22): 7696-7703.
29. Goodworth AD, Mellodge P, Peterka RJ. Stance width changes how sensory feedback is used for multisegmental balance control. J Neurophysiol, 2014, 112(3): 525-542.
30. Horak FB, Dimitrova D, Nutt JG. Direction-specific postural instability in subjects with Parkinson’s disease. Exp Neurol, 2005, 193(2): 504-521.
31. Swanenburg J, De Bruin ED, Uebelhart D, et al. Falls prediction in elderly people: a 1-year prospective study. Gait Posture, 2010, 31(3): 317-321.

West China Medical Journal

Effect of foot spacing on multi-directional reach test in the normal elderly and elderly hemiplegic patients

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Previous Article

Next Article

Format

Content