Skip to main content

Table 10 Summary Table of the Tandem Gait and Stance test as a falls assessment tool

From: Predicting falls in older adults: an umbrella review of instruments assessing gait, balance, and functional mobility

Review Review characteristics Risk of bias assessment Summary of key findings Interpretation
Chen-Ju Fu [39] Meta-analysis
(n = 15)
Elderly aged over 65 years who can walk without assistance
High Maximal standing time of the tandem stance test was reported with low heterogeneity (I2 = 0%) and significant group difference (−3.84 seconds [−5.49–-2.18], p < 0.001, (n = 2) Favorable
Scott [35] Systematic review without meta-analysis
(n = 1)
High Community dwelling:
Sensitivity 55%, specificity 94%
Dolatabadi [26] systematic review without meta-analysis Unclear No data to extract Inconsistent
Kozinc [40] Meta-analysis
(n = 3)
Mixed settings
Unclear Sensitivity was moderate for single-leg stance time (51–67%). The specificity was high only for single-leg stance time in one study (89%) and low to moderate in other studies (43–67%). Inconsistent
Lusardi [9] Meta-analysis
(n = 3)
Unclear Tandem Stance (n = 2):
Posttest probability of falling on the basis of tandem stance time positive likelihood ratio 1.3, negative likelihood ratio 0.2, post-test probability with a positive test 41%, post-test probability with a negative test 23%,
sensitivity 56%, specificity 65%
Tandem walk (n = 1)
Tandem walk (able/unable)
positive likelihood ratio 1.6, negative likelihood ratio 0.7, post-test probability with a positive test 36%, post-test probability with a negative test 8%,
sensitivity 96%, specificity 23%
Inconsistent/favourable for tandem walk
Eagles [27] Systematic review without meta-analysis
(n = 1)
Emergency department
Low Unable to perform tandem gait: 59%. No association between ability to perform tandem gait and self-report falls in 90 days (p-value = 0.526) Not favourable
Ganz [28] Systematic review without meta-analysis
(n = 1)
Low Inability to perform a tandem walk test (i.e., inability to walk with the heel of one foot touching the toe of the next over 2 m) (LR, 2.4; 95% CI 2.0–2.9)
Inability to perform a tandem stand predicts the occurrence of 1 or more falls (LR, 2.0; 95% CI 1.7–2.4)
Muir [42] Meta-analysis
(n = 13)
Low Significant associations for increased fall risk were found for tandem walk for 5 out of the 6 studies. Not data reported.
Statistically significant associations for increased falls risk for tandem stand for 4 out of the 9 studies. No data reported.
Favourable for tandem walk. Inconsistent for tandem stand
  1. Abbreviations: CI Confidence interval, LR Likelihood Ratio, n number of included studies