Agreement between different methods of measuring height in elderly patients

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. RESULTS: 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.