Km. Means et Ps. O'Sullivan, Modifying a functional obstacle course to test balance and mobility in thecommunity, J REHAB RES, 37(5), 2000, pp. 621-632
Citations number
13
Categorie Soggetti
Rehabilitation,"Ortopedics, Rehabilitation & Sport Medicine
Journal title
JOURNAL OF REHABILITATION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
A previously reported functional obstacle course (FOC) developed to assess
elderly persons with and without balance and mobility impairment was used i
n a hospital-based study of 237 participants. A new modified version of the
FOC was developed for use in a community-based study, by placing some obst
acles next to walls instead of between parallel bars. These modifications e
liminate the need for parallel bars or for extra personnel to interchange t
he obstacles. We were concerned that the modifications could affect perform
ance scores, because touching or holding onto the now eliminated parallel b
ars could influence FOC scores under the original scoring system. To determ
ine the effect of these modifications on FOC performance, we tested 36 volu
nteers, (18 fallers [falls within last year] and 18 non-fallers), on the mo
dified parts of the old and new versions of the FOG. Random testing order a
nd inter-trial rests were used. For both the old and new FOC versions, we s
ummed quality and task completion time scores from the six modified obstacl
es (artificial turf, carpet, pine bark, sand, up ramp and down ramp) to cre
ate scores for quality and time. Our hypothesis was that there would be no
performance difference between the original and modified obstacle course. U
sing a two-factor repeated-measures analysis of variance, we found no diffe
rence in quality scores between the two FOC versions and no effect of an in
teraction between faller status and the course versions. We did find that t
he time was approximately 2 seconds longer for the new version; however, th
e time increase was the same for fallers and non-fallers. These data show t
hat fallers and non-fallers have comparable performance on both versions of
the FOG; however, to compare the two obstacle courses we recommend an adju
stment of 2 seconds in time scores. The obstacle course modifications will
facilitate more extensive and efficient use of the obstacle course as a res
earch tool to assess balance and mobility.