Provider: Ingenta Connect
Database: Ingenta Connect
TY - ABST
AU - Frid, H.
AU - Thors Adolfsson, E.
AU - Rosenblad, A.
AU - Nydahl, M.
TI - Agreement between different methods of measuring height in elderly patients
JO - Journal of Human Nutrition & Dietetics
PY - 2013-10-01T00:00:00///
VL - 26
IS - 5
SP - 504
EP - 511
N2 - Abstract Background
The present study aimed to examine the agreement between measurements of standing height and self‐reported height, height measured
with a sliding caliper, and height estimated from either demispan or knee height in elderly patients. Methods
Fifty‐five patients (mean age 79 years) at a Swedish hospital
were included in this observational study. The participants' heights were evaluated as the standing height, self‐reported height, height measured in a recumbent position with a sliding caliper, and height estimated from the demispan or knee height.
The measurements made with a sliding caliper in the recumbent position agreed most closely with the standing height. Ninety‐five percent of the individuals' differences from standing height were within an interval of +1.1 to −4.8 cm
(limits of agreement). Self‐reported height and height estimated from knee height differed relatively strongly from standing height. The limits of agreement were +5.2 to −9.8 cm and +9.4 to −6.2 cm, respectively. The widest distribution of differences was found
in the height estimated from the demispan, with limits of agreements from +11.2 to −9.3 cm. Conclusions
When measuring the height of patients who find it difficult to stand
upright, a sliding caliper should be the method of choice, and the second choice should be self‐reported height or the height estimated from knee height. Estimating height from the demispan should be the method of last resort.
UR - http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/bsc/jhnd/2013/00000026/00000005/art00013
M3 - doi:10.1111/jhn.12031
UR - https://doi.org/10.1111/jhn.12031