Obstacle Course: Assessment of Functional Mobility and Balance in the Elderly

Year 2022, , 56 - 61, 31.08.2022

Hasan Yılmaz , Barış Gürpınar , Hülya Tuna , Nursen İlçin

https://doi.org/10.47141/geriatrik.1021870

Abstract

An Obstacle Course (OC) is a series of physical obstacles that individuals or teams must overcome in a certain time period. OC applications are differentiated by changing walking, running, climbing, splashing, crawling, balance, or mental parameters for its purpose. In order to assess and treat balance and mobility problems in the elderly population, the obstacles on the course are designed to simulate the activities they encounter in daily life. The OCs used in this group generally consist of different surfaces, obstacles of various heights, and obstacles such as stairs and ramps. In the literature, there are OC examples with various parts, such as walking, jumping over obstacles, climbing stairs, and walking on different surfaces. However, there is no standardization on the content (duration, number of obstacles, length, material used) of OCs used for evaluation and treatment purposes. Although OCs are structured in different features, their most significant advantage is their ability to simulate real-life functional tasks and to provide functionally oriented information about dynamic balance and mobility in the person-environment relationship during the performance of these tasks. Exercise programs aimed at preventing falls in the elderly are becoming more functional day by day. Nevertheless, balance and fall assessments in the elderly with a history of falls are usually performed with laboratory or clinical tests. These tests, which are used in balance assessment, are mostly far from reflecting the activities of the individual in daily life and the problems encountered in daily life. OCs provide essential advantages in measuring balance and other parameters against the obstacles encountered in daily life and offering treatment opportunities.

Keywords

obstacle course, elderly, balance, fall

Engel Parkuru: Yaşlılarda Fonksiyonel Mobilite ve Denge Değerlendirmesi

Abstract

Engel parkuru (EP), bireylerin ya da takımların belli bir zaman diliminde aşması gereken fiziksel engeller serisidir. EP uygulamaları, amacına yönelik olarak yürüme, koşu, tırmanma, sıçrama, sürünme, denge veya zihinsel parametreleri yerleştirilerek farklılaştırılır. Yaşlı popülasyonda, denge ve hareketlilik problemlerini belirlemek ve tedavi etmek amacıyla, parkurdaki engeller günlük yaşamda karşılaştıkları aktiviteleri simule edecek şekilde tasarlanır. Bu grupta kullanılan EP’ler genel olarak; farklı zeminler, çeşitli yükseklikteki engeller, merdiven ve rampa gibi engellerden oluşur. Literatürde yürüme, engel üzerinden atlama, merdiven çıkma, farklı zeminlerde yürüme gibi çeşitli bölümlerden oluşan EP örnekleri yer almaktadır. Ancak hem değerlendirme hem de tedavi amacıyla kullanılan engel parkurlarının içeriği (süresi, engel sayısı, uzunluğu, kullanılan materyal) konusunda bir standardizasyon bulunmamaktadır. EP’ler farklı özelliklerde yapılandırılmış olsalar da en büyük avantajları, gerçek yaşamdaki fonksiyonel görevlerin simüle edilmesi ve bu görevlerin gerçekleştirilmesi sırasında, kişi-çevre ilişkisinde dinamik denge ve mobilite hakkında işlevsel olarak yönlendirilmiş bilgi sağlama yetenekleridir. Yaşlılarda düşmeleri önlemeye yönelik egzersiz programları gün geçtikçe daha fonksiyonel olmaya başlamasına karşın düşme öyküsü olan yaşlılarda denge ve düşme değerlendirmeleri genellikle laboratuvar ya da klinik testler ile yapılmaktadır. Denge değerlendirmesinde kullanılan bu testler çoğunlukla bireyin günlük yaşamdaki aktivitelerini ve günlük yaşamda karşılaşılan sorunları yansıtmaktan uzaktır. Engel parkurları kişinin günlük yaşamda karşılaşılan engeller karşısında denge ve diğer parametreleri ölçmesi ve tedavi olanağı sunması açısından önemli avantajlar sağlamaktadır.

Keywords

engel parkuru, yaşlı, denge, düşme

References

• 1. Means KM, O Sullivan PS. Modifying a functional obstacle course to test balance and mobility in the community. Journal ıf Rehabilitation Research and Development. 2000;37(5):621-32.
• 2. Imms F, Edholm O. Studies of gait and mobility in the elderly. Age and Ageing. 1981;10(3):147-56.
• 3. Rubenstein LZ, Josephson KR. Falls and their prevention in elderly people: what does the evidence show? Medical Clinics. 2006;90(5):807-24.
• 4. Means KM. The obstacle course: a tool for the assessment of functional balance and mobility in the elderly. Journal of Rehabilitation Research and Development. 1996;33:413-28.
• 5. Harley C, Wilkie RM, Wann JP. Stepping over obstacles: attention demands and aging. Gait & Posture. 2009;29(3):428-32.
• 6. Yamada M, Tanaka H, Mori S, et al. Fallers choose an early transfer gaze strategy during obstacle avoidance in dual-task condition. Aging Clinical and Experimental Research. 2011;23(4):316-9.
• 7. Rubenstein L, Josephson K, Trueblood P, et al. The reliability and validity of an obstacle course as a measure of gait and balance in older adults. Aging Clinical and Experimental Research. 1997;9(1):127-35.
• 8. Attix E, Nichols J. Establishing a low back school. Southern Medical Journal. 1981;74(3):327-31.
• 9. Taylor MJ. Standardized Walking Obstacle Course: Reliability and Validity of a Functional Measurement Tool. Journal of Neurologic Physical Therapy. 1997;21(5):167.
• 10. Held SL, Kott KM, Young BL. Standardized Walking Obstacle Course (SWOC): reliability and validity of a new functional measurement tool for children. Pediatric Physical Therapy. 2006;18(1):23-30.
• 11. Morat T, Kroeger D, Mechling H. The Multisurface Obstacle Test for older adults (MSOT): development and reliability of a novel test for older adults. European Review of Aging and Physical Activity. 2013;10(2):117-25.
• 12. Jung J, Lee J, Chung E, et al. The effect of obstacle training in water on static balance of chronic stroke patients. Journal of Physical Therapy Science. 2014;26(3):437-40.
• 13. Means KM, Rodell DE, O’Sullivan PS. Balance, mobility, and falls among community-dwelling elderly persons: effects of a rehabilitation exercise program. American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation. 2005;84(4):238-50.
• 14. Yamada M, Aoyama T, Arai H, et al. Complex obstacle negotiation exercise can prevent falls in community‐dwelling elderly Japanese aged 75 years and older. Geriatrics & Gerontology International. 2012;12(3):461-7.
• 15. Means KM, Rodell DE, O'Sullivan PS. Use of an Obstacle Course to Assess Balance and Mobility in the Elderly: A Validation Study. American Journal of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation. 1996;75(2):88-95.
• 16. King MB, Tinetti ME. Falls in community‐dwelling older persons. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society. 1995;43(10):1146-54.
• 17. Province MA, Hadley EC, Hornbrook MC, et al. The effects of exercise on falls in elderly patients: a preplanned meta-analysis of the FICSIT trials. Jama. 1995;273(17):1341-7.
• 18. Berg WP, Alessio HM, Mills EM, et al. Circumstances and consequences of falls in independent community-dwelling older adults. Age and Ageing. 1997;26(4):261-8.
• 19. Menant JC, St George RJ, Fitzpatrick RC, et al. Impaired depth perception and restricted pitch head movement increase obstacle contacts when dual-tasking in older people. Journals of Gerontology Series A: Biomedical Sciences and Medical Sciences. 2010;65(7):751-7.
• 20. Burton E, Lewin G, O’Connell H, et al. Falls prevention in community care: 10 years on. Clinical Interventions in Aging. 2018;13:261.
• 21. Sibley KM, Straus SE, Inness EL, et al. Clinical balance assessment: perceptions of commonly-used standardized measures and current practices among physiotherapists in Ontario, Canada. Implementation Science. 2013;8(1):1-8.
• 22. Nnodim JO, Yung RL. Balance and its clinical assessment in older adults–a review. Journal of Geriatric Medicine and Gerontology. 2015;1(1).