Predictive value of stabilometry and fear of falling on falls in postmenopausal women
Abstract
Objectives Falls are one of the leading causes of fractures and impaired quality of life in the elderly, and they are related to balance deficit and to fear of falls. The purpose of our study is to evaluate predictors of falls in the 50-65-year-old postmenopausal population. Methods A prospective cohort study was conducted on 96 postmenopausal women. Fear of falling and postural stability were assessed by using the FES-I (Falls Efficacy Scale-International) and a force platform, respectively. Fall frequency was determined in the 12-month follow-up study period. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify predictive factors of falls. Results Fear of falls, the FES-I scale and four stabilometric parameters, specifically under eyes-closed condition, were significantly higher in the group of fallers. The root mean square amplitude in the medial-lateral direction with eyes closed (RMSXec) (odds ratio 5.1, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.6-15.5, p = 0.004) and FES-I (odds ratio 3.4, 95% CI 1.1-10.5, p = 0.026) were the best independent predictive factors of the risk of falling. Conclusions RMSXec > 0.133 was the best predictive factor for falls in our group of 50-65-year-old postmenopausal women studied, and a FES-I score > 20 could predict falls in this population.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The RMSX stabilometric parameter is increased in patients at risk of falls.
“In this sense, RMSX stabilometric parameter has been found increased in patients at risk of falls [23].”
From Impaired Balance in Patients with Fibromyalgia Syndrome: Predictors of the Impact of This Disorder and Balance Confidence (2020) · cites this paper as [23]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Peinado-Rubia, A., Osuna-Pérez, M. C., Rodríguez-Almagro, D., Zagalaz-Anula, N., López-Ruiz, M. C., & Lomas-Vega, R. (2020) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph17093160 · Cited by 38 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Hita-Contreras, F., Martínez-Amat, A., Lomas-Vega, R., Álvarez, P., Aránega, A., Martínez-López, E., & Mendoza, N.
- Affiliations
- Universidad de Granada (ES)
- ORCID
- Aránega, A.
- Venue
- Climacteric
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2012-11
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 584-589
- ISSN
- 1369-7137 (ISSN-L)
- 1473-0804
- OpenAlex
- W2078918068
- Cited by
- 40
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2014: 4
- FWCI
- 3.18
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Climacteric (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation › Balance, Gait, and Falls Prevention
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Orthopedics and Sports Medicine › Bone health and osteoporosis research
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Menopause: Health Impacts and Treatments
- Keywords
- falls, postmenopausal women, fear of falling, posturography, postural stability, balance, Falls Efficacy Scale-International, fall risk prediction, middle-aged women, eyes-closed condition, root mean square amplitude
- MeSH terms
- Accidental Falls, Aged, Postural Balance, Fear, Female, Humans, Middle Aged, Prospective Studies, Cohort Studies, Body Mass Index, Logistic Models, Postmenopause
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review