Differences in Trunk Accelerometry Between Frail and Nonfrail Elderly Persons in Sit-to-Stand and Stand-to-Sit Transitions Based on a Mobile Inertial Sensor

Background: Clinical frailty syndrome is a common geriatric syndrome, which is characterized by physiological reserve decreases and increased vulnerability. The changes associated to ageing and frailties are associated to changes in gait characteristics and the basic functional capacities. Traditional clinical evaluation of Sit-to-Stand (Si-St) and Stand-to-Sit (St-Si) transition is based on visual observation of joint angle motion to describe alterations in coordination and movement pattern. The latest generation smartphones often include inertial sensors with subunits such as accelerometers and gyroscopes, which can detect acceleration. Objective: Firstly, to describe the variability of the accelerations, angular velocity, and displacement of the trunk during the Sit-to-Stand and Stand-to-Sit transitions in two groups of frail and physically active elderly persons, through instrumentation with the iPhone 4 smartphone. Secondly, we want to analyze the differences between the two study groups. Methods: A cross-sectional study that involved 30 subjects over 65 years, 14 frail and 16 fit subjects. The participants were classified with frail syndrome by the Fried criteria. Linear acceleration was measured along three orthogonal axes using the iPhone 4 accelerometer. Each subject performed up to three successive Si-St and St-Si postural transitions using a standard chair with armrest. Results: Significant differences were found between the two groups of frail and fit elderly persons in the accelerometry and angular displacement variables obtained in the kinematic readings of the trunk during both transitions. Conclusions: The inertial sensor fitted in the iPhone 4 is able to study and analyze the kinematics of the Si-St and St-Si transitions in frail and physically active elderly persons. The accelerometry values for the frail elderly are lower than for the physically active elderly, while variability in the readings for the frail elderly is also lower than for the control group.