@article{ref1,
title="Fear of falling as a risk factor of mobility disability in older people at five diverse sites of the IMIAS study",
journal="Archives of gerontology and geriatrics",
year="2016",
author="Auais, Mohammad and Alvarado, Beatriz E. and Curcio, Carmen-Lucia and Garcia, Angeles and Ylli, Alban and Deshpande, Nandini",
volume="66",
number="",
pages="147-153",
abstract="BACKGROUND: Fear of falling (FoF) is a common health problem among older adults. Although the relationship between FoF and limitation in daily activities has been reported, FoF's relationship to mobility disability, a transitional phase to end-stage disability, is not yet understood. We examined the relationship between FoF and mobility disability among community-dwelling older adults and explored the differences in this relationship among socio-culturally diverse sites. <br><br>DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Community. PARTICIPANTS: 1875 participants (65-74 years) were recruited from five sites and included in the analysis (Kingston, Canada: 394; St-Hyacinthe, Canada: 397; Tirana, Albania: 359; Manizales, Colombia: 341; and Natal, Brazil: 384). MEASUREMENT: FoF was quantified using the Falls Efficacy Scale-International (FES-I, range: 16-64). Mobility disability was defined as difficulty climbing a flight of stairs or walking 400m without assistance. <br><br>RESULTS: Overall, 21.5% of participants reported high FoF (FES-I>27). The average FoF scores were significantly different between the sites (p<0.001) and higher in women (p<0.001). In general, 36.2% of participants reported mobility disability. The distribution of mobility disability was significantly different at the five study sites (ranged from 19.8% at Kingston, Canada to 50.7% at Tirana, Albania, p<0.001). After adjusting for covariates, those with high and moderate FoF had about 3 times (95% CI: 2.59-3.83) and 2.5 times (95% CI: 1.99-2.91) higher risk of mobility disability, respectively, compared to those with no/low FoF. <br><br>CONCLUSIONS: FoF was significantly associated with risk of mobility disability across the sites. The strength of this relationship appears to be different between the five sites.<br><br>Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.<p /> <p>Language: en</p>",
language="en",
issn="0167-4943",
doi="10.1016/j.archger.2016.05.012",
url="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.archger.2016.05.012"
}