Measuring Methods for Functional Reach Test: Comparison of 1-Arm Reach and 2-Arm Reach

Kage, Haruko; Okuda, Masayuki; Nakamura, Ippei; Kunitsugu, Ichiro; Sugiyama, Shinichi; Hobara, Tatsuya

doi:10.1016/j.apmr.2009.07.021

Cited by 20 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A notable ceiling effect observed in the tandem stance test can also be regarded as a limitation, but this was seen only in the control group. Thirdly, it has been shown that the FRT using only one arm is more valid than the test in which both arms are used [38]. The latter version was our preference in order to minimise the influence of trunk rotation on the reach performance.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of heat stress on physical functioning in persons with multiple sclerosis

Romberg¹,

Ikonen²,

Ruutiainen³

et al. 2012

Journal of the Neurological Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effects of heat stress on physical functioning in persons with multiple sclerosis

Romberg¹,

Ikonen²,

Ruutiainen³

et al. 2012

Journal of the Neurological Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The Functional Reach Test was used to assess balance [25]. It is a fast and convenient test that shows a good interexaminer reliability (ICC = 0.81) [26].…”

Section: Balancementioning

confidence: 99%

A serious game developed for physical rehabilitation of frail elderly

Soares¹,

Júnior

Hounsell

et al. 2016

European Research in Telemedicine / La Recherche Européenne en

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…However, previous studies have reported that the FRT has been affected by the age and height of individuals, 3 trunk mobility, 4 and the measurement method. 5 If these factors work as systematic biases, the validity of the FRT as a balance and fall risk assessment tool may need to be re-considered. Furthermore, the interpretation of FRT results is difficult because there is no reference value on which to base interpretation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Determination of the reference value and systematic bias of the functional reach test in Japanese elderly people by meta-analysis

Kamide

Takahashi-Narita

Kawamura

et al. 2012

Journal of Clinical Gerontology and Geriatrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tBackground/Purpose: The functional reach test (FRT), which was developed as a clinical balance assessment tool, has been widely used as a fall risk assessment tool in elderly people. The aim of the present study was to investigate the reference value and the presence of systematic bias in the FRT using the methodology of meta-analysis in community-dwelling elderly people. Methods: Relevant research articles were sought from electronic databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and Igakucyuouzasshi. The search was conducted from January 1990 to August 2011, and the terms "functional reach" and "elderly" were used in combination in the search. The searches were limited to peer-reviewed research articles involving Japanese elderly people with good functioning, aged 60 years and older. Weighted means were calculated for the reference value of FRT by a fixed effect model and a random effect model. Furthermore, weighted least squares regression was performed to determine the presence of systematic bias in the reference value of FRT. Results: A total of 19 articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria, including 4274 participants whose mean age ranged from 69.0 to 81.4 years. The reference value of FRT was 29.44 cm (95% confidence interval: 27.60e31.27 cm) using the random-effect model, since the reference value using the fixed-effect model was found to have significant heterogeneity. Furthermore, multivariate weighted least squares regression was performed, and sex, age, height, and measurement method (one-arm or two-arm reach) were all independently associated with the FRT value (multiple R 2 ¼ 0.295, c 2 ¼ 76.6, p < 0.001).Conclusions: Since participants' characteristics (sex, age, and height) and measurement method are probably related to systematic error in the FRT, judgment of physical function in elderly people using only the reference value determined in this study may have limitations.

show abstract

Measuring Methods for Functional Reach Test: Comparison of 1-Arm Reach and 2-Arm Reach

Cited by 20 publications

References 21 publications

The effects of heat stress on physical functioning in persons with multiple sclerosis

The effects of heat stress on physical functioning in persons with multiple sclerosis

A serious game developed for physical rehabilitation of frail elderly

Determination of the reference value and systematic bias of the functional reach test in Japanese elderly people by meta-analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About