Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Practice Point
  • Published:

Pushing or pulling to predict falls in Parkinson disease?

Nature Clinical Practice Neurology volume 4, pages 530–531 (2008)Cite this article

Abstract

This Practice Point commentary discusses the findings and limitations of an open-label study in which the standard pull test was compared with the new 'push and release' (PR) test to identify fallers among patients with Parkinson disease. Patients were divided into two groups (prior fallers, n = 36, and non-fallers, n = 46) and received the two tests in both a dopaminergic on and an off state. In the off state, both balance tests had similar diagnostic accuracy, but, in the on state, the PR test was more accurate than the pull test in classifying retrospective fallers (76.8% vs 87.8%). This commentary critically discusses the merits of the present findings. We also highlight the importance of evaluating Parkinson patients who are prone to falling, and the need to select the appropriate battery of balance tests on the basis of medication condition.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Hely MA et al. (2005) Sydney Multicenter Study of Parkinson's disease: non-L-dopa-responsive problems dominate at 15 years. Mov Disord 20: 190–199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Pickering RM et al. (2007) A meta-analysis of six prospective studies of falling in Parkinson's disease. Mov Disord 22: 1892–1900

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bloem BR et al. (1998) Clinimetrics of postural instability in Parkinson's disease. J Neurol 245: 669–673

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Jacobs JV et al. (2006) An alternative clinical postural stability test for patients with Parkinson's disease. J Neurol 253: 1404–1413

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Valkovic P et al. (2008) Push and release test predicts better Parkinson fallers and nonfallers than the Pull Test: comparison in OFF and ON medication states. Mov Disord 23: 1453–1457

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CJ Hass is Assistant Professor in the Department of Applied Physiology and Kinesiology, and MS Okun is the Adelaide Lackner Associate Professor of Neurology in the McKnight Brain Institute, at the University of Florida, Gainsville, FL, USA.,

    Christopher J Hass & Michael S Okun

  2. BR Bloem is Professor of Neurology at the Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.,

    Bastiaan R Bloem

Authors
  1. Christopher J Hass
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bastiaan R Bloem
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michael S Okun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael S Okun.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hass, C., Bloem, B. & Okun, M. Pushing or pulling to predict falls in Parkinson disease?. Nat Rev Neurol 4, 530–531 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1038/ncpneuro0912

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ncpneuro0912

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing