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%

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

  1. Abbreviations: CI Confidence interval, LR Likelihood Ratio, n number of included studies