Background:
Falls are a common and widespread problem among the elderly, and a third of people over the age of 65 and up to half of the people over 85 falls each year.
Many of the currently used assessment tools are subjective, qualitative, and use threshold assessment scores to either categorize people as fallers or non-fallers. Subjective tests rely on the knowledge and experience of the assessor, decreasing the accuracy of the balance assessment which calls for more objective assessment tools
Force-platforms are considered the gold-standard for the assessment of balance. However, the feasibility of routinely using them in clinical settings relates to their immobility and high cost. As a proxy to measure postural stability, accelerometry may be a convenient method for acquiring clinically-relevant measures for balance, comparable with those from force-platforms.
Purpose:
Investigate whether MOTI is a reliable tool for assessing standing balance that can give similar results as a force-platform (gold standard).
Methods:
A cross sectional study design with 30 subjects. Data was collected using a force-platform and an accelerometer (MOTI) in different standing balance positions.
Correlation and test-retest reliability was investigated with ICC 3.1.
Results:
Correlation between MOTI and the force-platform ranged from poor to good. The test-retest reliability of MOTI ranged from poor to moderate.
Conclusion:
MOTI has the highest correlation and test-retest reliability for double-leg stance with both eyes open and closed eyes. MOTI has the lowest correlation for single-leg stance with eyes open and lowest test-retest reliability in single-leg stance with closed eyes.