Elsevier

Gait & Posture

Volume 41, Issue 4, May 2015, Pages 935-940
Gait & Posture

Sensor-based monitoring of sit-to-stand performance is indicative of objective and self-reported aspects of functional status in older adults

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2015.03.350Get rights and content

Highlights

  • We investigated the clinical relevance of sensor-based sit-to-stand (STS) measures.

  • In particular chest STS measures showed associations with standard clinical measures.

  • Chest peak power and chest scaled peak power showed adequate discriminative ability.

  • Sensor-based monitoring of STS performance is clinically relevant in older adults.

Abstract

Studies show that body-fixed motion sensors can be used for long-term monitoring of sit-to-stand (STS) performance in older persons. However, it is unclear how sensor-based measures of STS performance relate to functional status in older adults. Therefore, this study investigated the associations between sensor-based STS measures and standard clinical measures of functional status in older adults. Participants (24 females, 12 males; 72–94 years) performed five normal STS movements while wearing motion sensors on the hip and chest. Objective measures were used to assess mobility (Timed-Up-and-Go Test, Five-Times-Sit-to-Stand Test, Stair Walk Test) and quadriceps strength. Self-reported questionnaires were used to assess limitations in activities of daily living (Groningen Activity Restriction Scale) and frailty (Groningen Frailty Indicator). In general, chest STS measures showed a larger number of significant associations and stronger associations with clinical measures than hip STS measures. Chest maximal velocity, chest peak power, chest scaled peak power and chest stabilization phase SD demonstrated significant associations (weak to strong) with all six clinical measures. Noteworthy is that hip stabilization phase SD showed significant associations (weak to moderate) with five clinical measures. In particular chest peak power and chest scaled peak power demonstrated a moderate ability to discriminate between higher and lower functioning individuals (area under the receiver–operating characteristic curve: 0.75–0.90). This study shows that in particular chest STS measures are indicative of objective and self-reported aspects of functional status in older adults. These findings support the clinical relevance of sensor-based monitoring of STS performance in older persons.

Introduction

With aging functional status may decline, therefore it is important to monitor functioning in older adults and to timely initiate interventions to prevent loss of functional abilities. Methods for the monitoring of motor functioning have been developed using body-fixed motion sensors [1]. Sensor-based measurement of leg power may be a relevant addition to existing sensor-based methods. Leg power is a determinant of mobility (changing basic body position, i.e. getting into and out of a body position and moving from one location to another [2]) and an important parameter for measuring intervention effects [3], [4], [5], [6]. Motion sensors can be used to estimate vertical peak power during the STS transfer [7] with adequate reliability and sensitivity to change [8], [9], [10].

However, it is unclear how sensor-based STS peak power and other STS measures (e.g. maximal velocity) relate to the functional status of older adults. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate the associations between sensor-based STS measures and standard clinical measures of functional status in older adults. STS measures were calculated from an individual sensor, because from a practical perspective a single sensor is preferred over multiple sensors. Studies show that leg power is associated with mobility, leg strength, self-reported measures of activities and mobility [3], [4], [5], [6]. Therefore, we hypothesized that sensor-based STS peak power is associated with mobility, leg strength, self-reported measures of limitations in activities and frailty. In addition, we hypothesized that STS peak power is more strongly associated with the aforementioned aspects of functional status than other STS measures. As part of the study aim, we also investigated the ability of STS peak power to discriminate between higher and lower functioning individuals.

Section snippets

Participants

Participants were 36 older adults (24 females, 12 males; age: 72–94 years (mean ± SD: 82.2 ± 5.4 years); mass: 48.0–104.4 kg (79.3 ± 14.1 kg); height: 1.46–1.89 m (1.66 ± 0.10 m)). Inclusion criteria were: Age≥70 years, being able to perform STS movements and walk ≥10 m (with or without a wheeled walker or cane). Recruitment took place in a health care center, residential care home and sheltered houses. Exclusion criteria were: lower extremity orthopedic surgery or a stroke within the six months before the

Results

Table 1 shows the measurement outcomes. As a result of physical limitations not all participants were able to perform all clinical measurements (Table 1). The hip sensor data of one participant, and the chest sensor data of two other participants, were not analyzed due to missing samples. Scaled peak power and maximal velocity demonstrated multicollinearity (rs = 0.99) at both sensor locations.

Discussion

This study investigated the associations between sensor-based STS measures and standard clinical measures of functional status in older adults. In general, chest STS measures showed a larger number of significant associations and stronger associations with clinical measures than hip STS measures. Chest maximal velocity, chest peak power, chest scaled peak power and chest stabilization phase SD demonstrated significant associations (weak to strong) with all six clinical measures. Noteworthy is

Conflict of interest statement

All authors made substantial contributions to the conception and design of the study, data acquisition, data analysis, data interpretation, drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content. Each of the authors has read and concurs with the content in the final manuscript. The authors have no conflicts of interest.

Acknowledgement

This study was supported by a grant from ZonMw (program ‘Diseasemanagement Chronische Ziekten’; project number 40-00812-98-09014). The sponsor was not involved in the study design, data collection, data analysis, data interpretation, writing of the manuscript and the decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

References (30)

  • J.F. Bean et al.

    A comparison of leg power and leg strength within the InCHIANTI study: which influences mobility more

    J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci

    (2003)
  • D.A. Skelton et al.

    Strength, power and related functional ability of healthy people aged 65–89 years

    Age Ageing

    (1994)
  • M. Foldvari et al.

    Association of muscle power with functional status in community-dwelling elderly women

    J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci

    (2000)
  • T. Muehlbauer et al.

    Relationship between strength, power and balance performance in seniors

    Gerontology

    (2012)
  • W. Zhang et al.

    Test–retest reliability of a pendant-worn sensor device in measuring chair rise performance in older persons

    Sensors (Basel)

    (2014)
  • Cited by (28)

    • Quantifying sit-to-stand and stand-to-sit transitions in free-living environments using the activPAL thigh-worn activity monitor

      2019, Gait and Posture
      Citation Excerpt :

      Standing-up and sitting-down are the most common and physically demanding manoeuvres that an individual performs [11–14], and the ability to stand up and sit down is a key factor in the maintenance of functional independence. Any change in the capability to perform these transitions in older individuals could be useful in determining the onset of frailty and provide an indicator of physical and cognitive impairment [12,13,15]. For those groups of people who have mobility related conditions, such as a stroke, the recovery of the ability to stand up and sit down is crucial and quantification of the quality of these movements could be useful for monitoring progress of recovery.

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text