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% | Inconsistent |
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) Community-dwelling | 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) Community-dwelling | 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) | Favourable |
Muir [42] | Meta-analysis (n = 13) Community-dwelling | 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 |