Dataset Information

Timed up and go test predicts mortality in older adults in Peru: a population-based cohort study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

While there is evidence about stablished risk factors (e.g., raised blood pressure) and higher mortality risk in older population, less has been explored about other functional parameters like the Timed Up and Go test and the Gait Speed in older people at low- and middle-income countries. We aimed to study these mobility tests as predictors of mortality in a population of older people in Peru.

Methods

Population-based prospective cohort study (2013-2020). Random sampling of people aged 60+ years in a community of Lima, Peru. Geriatricians conducted all clinical evaluations and laboratory tests were conducted in the local hospital. Participants were sought in the national vital registration system, and we collated cause (ICD-10) and date of death. We conducted a nested forward multivariate Cox proportional hazard model to identify all potential predictors of all-cause, communicable and non-communicable diseases mortality.

Results

At baseline, there were 501 older people (mean age 70.6 and 62.8% were women), complete follow-up information was available from 427 people. Mean follow-up time was 46.5 months (SD = 25.3). In multivariate models, the Timed Up and Go test was associated with higher risk of all-cause mortality (HR = 1.05; 95% CI: 1.02-1.09). For cause-specific mortality, history of heart disease (HR = 2.25; 95% CI: 1.07-4.76) and age in years (HR = 1.05; 95% CI: 1.01-1.09) were predictors of non-communicable diseases mortality.

Conclusions

In addition to established risk factors for mortality in older population, the Timed Up and Go test, a functional parameter, raised as a relevant predictor of all-cause mortality.

SUBMITTER: Ascencio EJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8767748 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPhysical performance tests are a reflection of health in older adults. The Timed Up and Go test is an easy-to-administer tool measuring physical performance. In older adults undergoing oncologic surgery, an impaired TUG has been associated with higher rates of postoperative complications and increased short term mortality. The objective of this study is to investigate the association between physical performance and long term outcomes.MethodsPatients aged ≥65 years undergoing surgery for solid tumors in three prospective cohort studies, 'PICNIC', 'PICNIC B-HAPPY' and 'PREOP', were included. The TUG was administered 2 weeks before surgery, a score of ≥12 seconds was considered to be impaired. Primary endpoint was 5-year survival, secondary endpoint was 30-day major complications. Survival proportions were estimated using Kaplan-Meier curves. Cox- and logistic regression analysis were used for survival and complications respectively. Hazard ratios (aHRs) and Odds ratios (aOR) were adjusted for literature-based and clinically relevant variables, and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) were estimated using multivariable models.ResultsIn total, 528 patients were included into analysis. Mean age was 75 years (SD 5.98), in 123 (23.3%) patients, the TUG was impaired. Five-year survival proportions were 0.56 and 0.49 for patients with normal TUG and impaired TUG respectively. An impaired TUG was an independent predictor of increased 5-year mortality (aHR 1.43, 95% CI 1.02-2.02). The TUG was not a significant predictor of 30-day major complications (aOR 1.46, 95% CI 0.70-3.06).ConclusionsAn impaired TUG is associated with increased 5-year mortality in older adults undergoing surgery for solid tumors. It requires further investigation whether an impaired TUG can be reversed and thus improve long-term outcomes.Trial registrationThe PICNIC studies are registered in the Dutch Clinical Trial database at www.trialregister.nl: NL4219 (2010-07-22) and NL4441 (2014-06-01). The PREOP study was registered with the Dutch trial registry at www.trialregister.nl: NL1497 (2008-11-28) and in the United Kingdom register (Research Ethics Committee reference 10/H1008/59). https://www.hra.nhs.uk/planning-and-improving-research/application-summaries/research-summaries/?page=15&query=preop&date_from=&date_to=&research_type=&rec_opinion=&relevance=true .

Project description:Background:Simple, easy-to-perform, safe and cost-effective methods for the prediction of adverse outcomes in older adults are essential for the identification of patients who are most likely to benefit from early preventive interventions. Methods:The study included 160 community-dwelling individuals aged 60-74 years, with 44.4% women. A comprehensive geriatric assessment was performed in all participants. Bioimpedance body composition analysis included 149 subjects. Among other tests, functional assessment included the Barthel Index of Activities of Daily Living (Barthel Index), Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Timed Up and Go (TUG) and Fried frailty phenotype. Follow-up by telephone was made after at least 365 days. The composite endpoint (CE) included fall, hospitalization, institutionalization and death. Results:Cohort characteristics: age 66.8±4.2 years (mean±SD), 3.81±2.23 diseases, 4.29±3.60 medications or supplements, and good functional status (MMSE 29.0±1.5, Barthel Index 98.1±8.2, prevalence of Fried frailty phenotype 2.5%). During one-year follow-up, 34 subjects (21.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI] =14.9-27.6%) experienced CE: hospitalizations (13.8%; 95% CI=8.41-19.1), falls (9.38%; 95% CI=4.86-13.9), death (0.63%; 95% CI=0-1.85) and no institutionalization. A higher probability of CE was associated with age ?70 years (P=0.018), taking any medication or supplements (P=0.007), usual pace gait speed ?0.8 m/s (P=0.028) and TUG >9 s (P<0.002). TUG was the only independent measure predicting one-year CE occurrence (OR=1.22, 95% CI=1.07-1.40, P=0.003) in multivariate logistic regression. However, its predictive power was poor; the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.659 (95% CI 0.551-0.766, P=0.004) and Youden's J statistic for a TUG cut-off of 9.0 s was 0.261 (sensitivity 0.618 and specificity 0.643). Conclusion:The TUG test was superior to frailty phenotype measures in predicting one-year incidence of a CE consisting of fall, hospitalization, institutionalization and death in a cohort of healthy-aging community-dwelling early-old adults, although its value as a stand-alone test was limited.

Project description:BackgroundFalling is common among older people. The Timed-Up-and-Go Test (TUG) is recommended as a screening tool for falls but its predictive value has been challenged. The objectives of this study were to examine the ability of TUG to predict future falls and to estimate the optimal cut-off point to identify those with higher risk for future falls.MethodsThis is a prospective cohort study nested within a randomised controlled trial including 259 British community-dwelling older people ≥65 years undergoing usual care. TUG was measured at baseline. Prospective diaries captured falls over 24 weeks. A Receiver Operating Characteristic curve analysis determined the optimal cut-off point to classify future falls risk with sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of TUG times. Logistic regression models examined future falls risk by TUG time.ResultsSixty participants (23%) fell during the 24 weeks. The area under the curve was 0.58 (95% confidence interval (95% CI) = 0.49-0.67, p = 0.06), suggesting limited predictive value. The optimal cut-off point was 12.6 seconds and the corresponding sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were 30.5%, 89.5%, 46.2%, and 81.4%. Logistic regression models showed each second increase in TUG time (adjusted for age, gender, comorbidities, medications and past history of two falls) was significantly associated with future falls (adjusted odds ratio (OR) = 1.09, 95% CI = 1.00-1.19, p = 0.05). A TUG time ≥12.6 seconds (adjusted OR = 3.94, 95% CI = 1.69-9.21, p = 0.002) was significantly associated with future falls, after the same adjustments.ConclusionsTUG times were significantly and independently associated with future falls. The ability of TUG to predict future falls was limited but with high specificity and negative predictive value. TUG may be most useful in ruling in those with a high risk of falling rather than as a primary measure in the ascertainment of risk.