Multidimensional Assessment of Fall Risk Using the Timed Up and Go Test and Complementary Measures in a Charcot-Marie-Tooth Type 1A Neuropathy.

Single centre, 40 patients, described by the authors as exploratory. The study was sized to detect only a large difference, so a smaller real association between TUG and falls could have been missed. The body text and the table disagree on how many patients were in each fall group: the text reports 12 patients with one to two falls and 8 with more than two, while the table reports 11 and 14. All participants could still walk, and disease severity varied widely between them, so this says nothing about patients who cannot walk or who need more help. Falls were recorded by the patients themselves in a diary, and people define what counts as a fall differently. Assessments depended on the examiner, with a high turnover of doctors, residents and physiotherapists, visits lasting 3 to 4 hours and missing data from broken equipment, so measurement error is likely. The authors did not adjust for treatments people were receiving or for their use of canes, rollators and braces, so the sarcopenia and strength findings may reflect other differences between the fall groups. The long questionnaires may have produced response fatigue and less accurate self-reported answers.

The authors state that the investigators have no financial or non-financial disclosures to make in relation to this project. No funding source is named in the text supplied.

Do not read the sarcopenia and muscle-strength findings as proof that strengthening or nutrition prevents falls in CMT1A. They come from secondary comparisons in an exploratory study of 40 people, the main question it set out to answer came back negative, and no treatment was tested.