High test-retest reliability was found for the Function component , while results for the Disability component were more variable .
Conclusions There is extensive evidence to support the construct validity and sensitivity to change of the LLFDI among various clinical population s of community-dwelling older adults .
Background The choice of measure for use as a primary outcome in geriatric research is contingent upon the construct of interest and evidence for its psychometric properties .
The Late-Life Function and Disability Instrument ( LLFDI ) has been widely used to assess functional limitations and disability in studies with older adults .
The primary aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the current available evidence for the psychometric properties of the LLFDI .
Integration of balance and strength training into daily life activity to reduce rate of falls in older people (the LiFE study): randomised parallel trial
Objectives To determine whether a lifestyle integrated approach to balance and strength training is effective in reducing the rate of falls  in older , high risk people living at home . Design Three arm , r and omised parallel trial ; assessment s at baseline and after six and 12 months . R and omisation done by computer generated r and om blocks , stratified by sex and fall history and concealed by an independent secure website . Setting Residents in metropolitan Sydney , Australia . Participants Participants aged 70 years or older who had two or more falls or one injurious fall in past 12 months , recruited from Veteran ’s Affairs data bases and general practice data bases . Exclusion criteria were moderate to severe cognitive problems , inability to ambulate independently , neurological conditions that severely influenced gait and mobility , resident in a nursing home or hostel , or any unstable or terminal illness that would affect ability to do exercises . Interventions Three home based interventions : Lifestyle integrated Functional Exercise ( LiFE ) approach ( n=107 ; taught principles of balance and strength training and integrated selected activities into everyday routines ) , structured programme ( n=105 ; exercises for balance and lower limb strength , done three times a week ) , sham control programme ( n=105 ; gentle exercise ) . LiFE and structured groups received five sessions with two booster visits and two phone calls ; controls received three home visits and six phone calls . Assessment s made at baseline and after six and 12 months . Main outcome measures Primary measure : rate of falls over 12 months , collected by self report . Secondary measures : static and dynamic balance ; ankle , knee and hip strength ; balance self efficacy ; daily living activities ; participation ; habitual physical activity ; quality of life ; energy expenditure ; body mass index ; and fat free mass . Results After 12 months ’ follow-up , we recorded 172 , 193 , and 224 falls in the LiFE , structured exercise , and control groups , respectively . The overall incidence of falls in the LiFE programme was 1.66 per person years , compared with 1.90 in the structured programme and 2.28 in the control group . We saw a significant reduction of 31 % in the rate of falls for the LiFE programme compared with controls ( incidence rate ratio 0.69 ( 95 % confidence interval 0.48 to 0.99 ) ) ; the corresponding difference between the structured group and controls was non-significant ( 0.81 ( 0.56 to 1.17 ) ) . Static balance on an eight level hierarchy scale , ankle strength , function , and participation were significantly better in the LiFE group than in controls . LiFE and structured groups had a significant and moderate improvement in dynamic balance , compared with controls . Conclusions The LiFE programme provides an alternative to traditional exercise to consider for fall prevention . Functional based exercise should be a focus for interventions to protect older , high risk people from falling and to improve and maintain functional capacity . Trial registration Australia and New Zeal and Clinical Trials Registry 12606000025538
High test-retest reliability was found for the Function component , while results for the Disability component were more variable .
Conclusions There is extensive evidence to support the construct validity and sensitivity to change of the LLFDI among various clinical population s of community-dwelling older adults .
Background The choice of measure for use as a primary outcome in geriatric research is contingent upon the construct of interest and evidence for its psychometric properties .
The Late-Life Function and Disability Instrument ( LLFDI ) has been widely used to assess functional limitations and disability in studies with older adults .
The primary aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the current available evidence for the psychometric properties of the LLFDI .