Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38257620›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2024

Stair-Fall Risk Parameters in a Controlled Gait Laboratory Environment and Real (Domestic) Houses: A Prospective Study in Faller and Non-Faller Groups.

Malarvizhi Ram, Vasilios Baltzopoulos, Andy Shaw, Costantinos N Maganaris, Jeff Cullen, Thomas O'Brien

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Malarvizhi RamResearch to Improve Stair Climbing Safety (RISCS), School of Sport and Exercise Sciences, Faculty of Science, Liverpool John Moores University, Byrom Street, Liverpool L3 3AF, UK.
Vasilios BaltzopoulosResearch to Improve Stair Climbing Safety (RISCS), School of Sport and Exercise Sciences, Faculty of Science, Liverpool John Moores University, Byrom Street, Liverpool L3 3AF, UK.
Andy ShawFaculty of Engineering and Technology, Liverpool John Moores University, Byrom Street, Liverpool L3 3AF, UK.
Costantinos N MaganarisResearch to Improve Stair Climbing Safety (RISCS), School of Sport and Exercise Sciences, Faculty of Science, Liverpool John Moores University, Byrom Street, Liverpool L3 3AF, UK.
Jeff CullenFaculty of Engineering and Technology, Liverpool John Moores University, Byrom Street, Liverpool L3 3AF, UK.
Thomas O'BrienResearch to Improve Stair Climbing Safety (RISCS), School of Sport and Exercise Sciences, Faculty of Science, Liverpool John Moores University, Byrom Street, Liverpool L3 3AF, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFalling on stairs is a major health hazard for older people. Risk factors for stair falls have been identified, but these are mostly examined in controlled biomechanics/gait laboratory environments, on experimental stairs with a given set of step dimensions. It remains unknown whether the conclusions drawn from these controlled environments would apply to the negotiation of other domestic staircases with different dimensions in real houses where people live.

objectivesThe aim of this paper is to investigate whether selected biomechanical stepping behavior determined through stair gait parameters such as foot clearance, foot contact length and cadence are maintained when the staircase dimensions are different in real houses.

methodsTwenty-five older adults (>65 years) walked on a custom-made seven-step laboratory staircase. Older adults were classified into two groups (fallers and non-fallers) based on recent fall history. Among the 25 participants, 13 people had at least one fall, trip, or slip in the last six months and they were assigned to the fallers group; 12 people did not experience any fall in the last six months, so they were assigned to the non-fallers group. In addition, these participants walked on the stairs in three different real exemplar houses wearing a novel instrumented shoe sensor system that could measure the above stair gait parameters. MATLAB was used to extract fall risk parameters from the collected data. One-way ANOVA was used to compare fall risk parameters on the different staircases. In addition, the laboratory-based fall risk parameters were compared to those derived from the real house stairs.

resultsThere was a significant difference in selected stair-fall biomechanical risk factors among the house and laboratory staircases. The fall risk group comparisons suggest that high-risk fallers implemented a biomechanically riskier strategy that could increase overall falling risk.

conclusionsThe significant differences due to the main effects of the fallers and non-fallers groups were obtained. For example, when ascending, the fallers group had less foot clearance on the entry (

Indexed as

GaitWalkingAgedEnvironment, ControlledFootHumansProspective StudiesCoM—center of massDf—degree of freedomFC—foot clearanceFCL1—foot contact length step 1FCL—foot contact lengthM—meanN—noN—total participantsRMP1—first metatarsophalangeal jointRMP5—fifth metatarsophalangeal jointSD—standard deviationSig—significanceY—yes

Identifiers

PMID38257620
PMCPMC10821270

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.