Impaired postural control in diabetes – a predictor of falls?

Summary: New evidence points toward that impaired postural control judged by center of pressure measures during quiet stance is a predictor of falls in people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes—even in occurrence of well-known risk factors for falls. Introduction/aim: People with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D) are at risk of falling, but the association with impaired postural control is unclear. Therefore, the aim was to investigate postural control by measuring the center of pressure (CoP) during quiet standing and to estimate the prevalence ratio (PR) of falls and the fear of falling among people with diabetes compared to controls. Methods: In a cross-sectional study, participants with T1D (n = 111) and T2D (n = 106) and controls without diabetes (n = 328) were included. Study procedures consisted of handgrip strength (HGS), vibration perception threshold (VPT), orthostatism, visual acuity, and postural control during quiet stance measured by CoP ^Area (degree of body sway) and CoP ^Velocity (speed of the body sway) with “eyes open,” “eyes closed” in combination with executive function tasks. A history of previous falls and fear of falling was collected by a questionnaire. CoP ^Area and CoP ^Velocity measurements were analyzed by using a multiple linear regression model. The PR of falls and the fear of falling were estimated by a Poisson regression model. Age, sex, BMI, previous falls, alcohol use, drug, HGS, VPT, orthostatism, episodes of hypoglycemia, and visual acuity were covariates in multiple adjusted analyses. Results: Significantly larger mean CoP ^Area measures were observed for participants with T1D (p = 0.022) and T2D (0.002), whereas mean CoP ^Velocity measures were only increased in participants with T2D (p = 0.027) vs. controls. Additionally, T1D and T2D participants had higher PRs for falls (p = 0.044, p = 0.014) and fear of falling (p = 0.006, p < 0.001) in the crude analyses, but the PRs reduced significantly when adjusted for mean CoP ^Area and mean CoP ^Velocity, respectively. Furthermore, multiple adjusted PRs were significantly higher than crude the analyses. Conclusion: Impaired postural control during quiet stance was seen in T1D and T2D compared with controls even in the occurrence of well-known risk factors. and correlated well with a higher prevalence of falls.