Back

Assessment of safe wheeled walker use in frail older adults: Development of a video-based rating instrument

Leonhardt, R.; Lindemann, U.; Schneider, M.; Rapp, K.; Klenk, J.

2026-06-08 geriatric medicine
10.64898/2026.06.04.26354904 medRxiv
Show abstract

Background: Wheeled walkers can improve safety during walking, but improper use may increase fall risk among frail older adults. No suitable tool exists to assess safe indoor wheeled walker use in this population. This study aimed to develop and validate a video-based expert assessment tool. Methods: Based on the literature and expert consensus, seven problematic indoor situations were identified, and an assessment tool with five safety criteria per situation was developed (maximum score = 35). Fifty participants (mean age 83.9 years, 64% women) from a geriatric rehabilitation clinic and a nursing home were video-recorded while using a rollator. Expert ratings were compared with nursing staff ratings, self-ratings, and the Timed Up and Go test to evaluate validity. Intra- and inter-rater reliability were determined from independent ratings by two physiotherapists and a repeated expert rating after seven days. Sensitivity to change was assessed after two weeks of rehabilitation, and feasibility by the time required for assessment. Results: The expert score of rater 1 at baseline was 28.5 points, and assessment required a mean of 17.5 minutes. Intra-rater reliability was excellent (ICC = 0.98) and inter-rater reliability was good (ICC = 0.80). Validity analyses showed the strongest association with nursing staff assessments (r = 0.74) and a moderate association with the Timed Up and Go test (r = -0.45). After two weeks, patients improved by an average of 2.38 points (8.4% of baseline score). Conclusions: The new instrument demonstrated high reliability, acceptable validity, sensitivity to change, and good feasibility for assessing safe wheeled walker use in frail older adults. Trial registration number and date of registration: DRKS00038358, 07/11/2025

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Journal of the American Medical Directors Association
13 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
18.0%
2
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 11%
16.9%
3
BMC Geriatrics
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
13.8%
4
Age and Ageing
27 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
6.6%
50% of probability mass above
5
Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
12 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.7%
6
Frontiers in Physiology
93 papers in training set
Top 1%
3.5%
7
BMJ Open
554 papers in training set
Top 6%
3.1%
8
The Journals of Gerontology: Series A
25 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
3.0%
9
Sensors
39 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
2.8%
10
Cureus
67 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.5%
11
Pilot and Feasibility Studies
12 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.0%
12
DIGITAL HEALTH
12 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.7%
13
BMC Neurology
12 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.6%
14
The Journals of Gerontology, Series A: Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences
22 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.4%
15
Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation
28 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.3%
16
Archives of Public Health
12 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.3%
17
Biology Methods and Protocols
53 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.2%
18
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
67 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.2%
19
Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine
27 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.2%
20
Experimental Gerontology
11 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.2%
21
Contemporary Clinical Trials Communications
11 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
1.2%
22
Frontiers in Neurology
91 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.8%
23
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health
124 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.8%
24
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 74%
0.8%
25
Frontiers in Digital Health
20 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
26
International Journal of Public Health
17 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.7%