RESUMO
RESUMO Introdução: Testes físicos seguros e confiáveis são importantes para rastrear risco de queda em idosos, entretanto, não existem estudos que tenham avaliado a segurança e a confiabilidade do teste Timed Up and Go (TUG) em idosos hospitalizados. Objetivos: Avaliar a segurança e reprodutibilidade do TUG em idosos hospitalizados. Métodos: Trata-se de um estudo transversal no qual foram coletadas três aferições do TUG para cada idoso, sendo considerado o melhor desempenho em segundos (s). Outras variáveis coletadas foram função cognitiva (MEEM), índice de comorbidades de Charlson, perfil admissional (clínico ou cirúrgico), relato de quedas no último ano e IMC. Para avaliar a confiabilidade relativa utilizou-se o coeficiente de correlação intraclasse (CCI) e para a confiabilidade absoluta, a análise de Bland-Altman. Resultados: Foram incluídos 68 idosos com média de idade de 70,4 ± 7,7 anos, índice de Charlson 5,4 ± 2,0 e predomínio do perfil clínico (64,7%). Nenhum dos 204 testes foi interrompido pelos critérios estabelecidos. Houve redução gradativa entre a primeira e a terceira aferição (1a = 11,6 ± 6,54; 2a = 10,7 ± 6,22 e 3a = 10,3 ± 5,54; p = 0,001) e elevado CCI (1a e 2a: CCI = 0,98; 1a e 3a: CCI = 0,98; 2a e 3a: CCI = 0,98; p = 0,001), sendo que a maior correlação com o melhor desempenho foi associada a 3a aferição (CCI = 0,99; p = 0,001). Identificou-se que os menores viés (0,29 s) e limites de concordância (-1,1 a 1,68 s) ocorreram também entre a terceira aferição e a de melhor desempenho. A medida de erro do método para avaliação da variabilidade foi 0,5 s e a alteração clinicamente significante 3,4 s. Conclusão: O TUG foi um instrumento seguro e com boa reprodutibilidade para mensuração do desempenho físico em idosos hospitalizados.
ABSTRACT Introduction: Safe and reliable physical tests are important to identify risk of falling in the elderly. However, there are no studies that have evaluated the safety and reliability of the test Timed Up and Go (TUG) in hospitalized elderly. Objectives: To evaluate the safety and reproducibility of the TUG in hospitalized elderly. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study where three measurements of the TUG were collected for each elderly, being considered the best performance in seconds (sec). Other variables collected were cognitive function (MMSE), Charlson comorbidity index, admission profile (clinical or surgical), history of falls in the last year and BMI. To assess the relative reliability we used the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and for the absolute reliability we used the Bland-Altman analysis. Results: The study included 68 elderly with a mean age 70.4 ± 7.7 years, Charlson index 5.4 ± 2.0 and prevalence of clinical profile (64.7%). None of the 204 tests was interrupted by the established criteria. There was a gradual reduction between the first and third measurement (1st = 11.6 ± 6.54; 2nd = 10.7 ± 6.22 and 3rd = 10.3 ± 5.54; p = 0.001) and high ICC (1st and 2nd: ICC = 0.98; 1st and 3rd: ICC = 0.98; 2nd and 3rd: ICC = 0.98; p = 0.001), and the highest correlation with the best performance was associated with third measurement (ICC = 0.99; p = 0.001). We identified that the smallest bias (0.29 sec) and limits of concordance (-1.1 to 1.68 sec) also occurred between the third measurement and the best performance. The measure of the method error to evaluate the variability was 0.5 sec, and the clinically significant change was 3.4 sec. Conclusion: The TUG was a safe instrument with good reproducibility for measuring physical performance in hospitalized elderly.
RESUMEN Introducción: Pruebas físicas seguras y fiables son importantes para el rastreo del riesgo de caídas en los ancianos; sin embargo, no existen estudios que evaluaron la seguridad y la fiabilidad de la prueba Timed Up and Go (TUG) en ancianos hospitalizados. Objetivos: Evaluar la seguridad y fiabilidad del TUG en ancianos hospitalizados. Métodos: Se trata de un estudio transversal en el que se recogieron tres mediciones del TUG para cada anciano y se considera el mejor rendimiento en segundos (s). Otras variables recogidas fueron la función cognitiva (MMSE), el índice de comorbilidad de Charlson, perfil de ingreso hospitalario (clínico o quirúrgico), antecedentes de caídas en el último año y el IMC. Para evaluar la fiabilidad relativa se utilizó el coeficiente de correlación intraclase (CCI) y para la fiabilidad absoluta, el análisis de Bland-Altman. Resultados: Se incluyeron 68 ancianos con una edad media de 70,4 ± 7,7 años, índice de Charlson 5,4 ± 2,0 y prevalencia del perfil clínico (64,7%). Ninguna de las 204 pruebas fue interrumpida por los criterios establecidos. Hubo una reducción gradual entre la primera y tercera medición (1a = 11,6 ± 6,54, 2a = 10,7 ± 6,22 y 3a = 10,3 ± 5,54, p = 0,001) y CCI alto (1a y 2a: CCI = 0,98; 1a y 3a: CCI = 0,98; 2a y 3a: CCI = 0,98; p = 0,001), y la más alta correlación con el mejor rendimiento se asoció con la tercera medición (ICC = 0,99; p = 0,001). Se identificó que el sesgo más pequeño (0,29 s) y límites de concordancia (-1,1 a 1,68 s) también se produjo entre la tercera medición y el mejor rendimiento. La medición del error del método para la evaluación de la variabilidad fue de 0,5 s y el cambio clínicamente significativo fue 3,4 s. Conclusión: El TUG fue un instrumento seguro y reproducible para medir el rendimiento físico en ancianos hospitalizados.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: The ability of the Timed Up and Go test to predict sarcopenia has not been evaluated previously. The objective of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of the Timed Up and Go test for predicting sarcopenia in elderly hospitalized patients. METHODS: This cross-sectional study analyzed 68 elderly patients (≥60 years of age) in a private hospital in the city of Salvador-BA, Brazil, between the 1st and 5th day of hospitalization. The predictive variable was the Timed Up and Go test score, and the outcome of interest was the presence of sarcopenia (reduced muscle mass associated with a reduction in handgrip strength and/or weak physical performance in a 6-m gait-speed test). After the descriptive data analyses, the sensitivity, specificity and accuracy of a test using the predictive variable to predict the presence of sarcopenia were calculated. RESULTS: In total, 68 elderly individuals, with a mean age 70.4±7.7 years, were evaluated. The subjects had a Charlson Comorbidity Index score of 5.35±1.97. Most (64.7%) of the subjects had a clinical admission profile; the main reasons for hospitalization were cardiovascular disorders (22.1%), pneumonia (19.1%) and abdominal disorders (10.2%). The frequency of sarcopenia in the sample was 22.1%, and the mean length of time spent performing the Timed Up and Go test was 10.02±5.38 s. A time longer than or equal to a cutoff of 10.85 s on the Timed Up and Go test predicted sarcopenia with a sensitivity of 67% and a specificity of 88.7%. The accuracy of this cutoff for the Timed Up and Go test was good (0.80; IC=0.66-0.94; p=0.002). CONCLUSION: The Timed Up and Go test was shown to be a predictor of sarcopenia in elderly hospitalized patients. .