Evaluation of unsupervised 30-second chair stand test performance assessed by wearable sensors to predict fall status in multiple sclerosis.
Lindsey J Tulipani, Brett Meyer, Dakota Allen and 2 others
PMID 35220031WHAT IT FOUND
Wearable sensors tracking chair stands at home over 48 hours detected fall risk in multiple sclerosis better than a single clinic test.
Non-fallers performed more repetitions at home than in the lab, while fallers' performance stayed consistent.
Key findings
01Maximum stand-to-sit time measured by sensors improved fall risk classification accuracy to 75.7% compared to 67.6% for the standard supervised repetition count.
02Non-fallers performed significantly more chair stand repetitions during unsupervised home monitoring than during the supervised clinic visit.
03Fallers showed no significant difference between their supervised clinic performance and their unsupervised home performance.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
Small sample size (n=37) and short monitoring period (48 hours) limit generalizability. Researchers could not verify if participants followed instructions for chair height or surface during home tests. The cohort had relatively low disability levels, so findings may not apply to those with more advanced MS. Fall status was based on patient recall over six months, which is subject to bias.
Declared interests
One author reports consulting for EMD Serono, Biogen, and Alexion, and research funding from Biogen. Another author reports stock ownership in MC10, Inc. (sensor manufacturer), consulting for HX Innovations Inc., and research funding from MC10, Inc. and Epicore Biosystems, Inc.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume that home performance is always superior or more representative. Non-fallers performed better at home, but fallers showed no difference, meaning clinic tests may accurately capture the limitations of those at higher risk.