4.6 Article Proceedings Paper

Binocular visual-field loss increases the risk of future falls in older white women

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN GERIATRICS SOCIETY
卷 55, 期 3, 页码 357-364

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2007.01094.x

关键词

binocular visual field loss; falls; older white women

资金

  1. NIAMS NIH HHS [AR35583, AR35584, AR35582] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIA NIH HHS [AG05394, AG05407] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

OBJECTIVES: To examine the relationship between binocular visual field loss and the risk of incident frequent falls in older white women. DESIGN: A multicenter, prospective cohort study. SETTING: Four clinic centers within the United States in Baltimore, Maryland; Minneapolis, Minnesota; Portland, Oregon; and the Monongahela Valley, Pennsylvania. PARTICIPANTS: Four thousand seventy-one community-dwelling white women aged 70 and older participating in the Study of Osteoporotic Fractures. MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcome was incident frequent falls, defined as two or more falls within 1 year. Primary risk factors were binocular visual field loss, distance visual acuity in the better eye, and contrast sensitivity at low spatial frequency in the better eye. RESULTS: Of 4,071 women, 409 (10%) had severe binocular visual field loss at the eye examination, and 643 (16%) experienced frequent falls within 1 year after their eye examination. Severe binocular visual field loss was significantly associated with frequent falls when adjusting for age, study site, and cognitive function (odds ratio=1.50, 95% confidence interval=1.11-2.02). The data showed a trend for increasing odds of two or more falls with greater binocular visual field loss (P <.001). In older white women with severe binocular visual field loss, 33.3% of frequent falls were attributable to visual field loss. CONCLUSION: Women with binocular visual field loss are at greater risk of future frequent falls. Screening for binocular visual field loss may identify individuals at high risk of falling.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据