Common Physical Performance Tests for Evaluating Health in Older Adults: Cross-Sectional Study.

IF 1.9 Q3 MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL
Chitra Banarjee, Renoa Choudhury, Joon-Hyuk Park, Rui Xie, David Fukuda, Jeffrey Stout, Ladda Thiamwong
{"title":"Common Physical Performance Tests for Evaluating Health in Older Adults: Cross-Sectional Study.","authors":"Chitra Banarjee, Renoa Choudhury, Joon-Hyuk Park, Rui Xie, David Fukuda, Jeffrey Stout, Ladda Thiamwong","doi":"10.2196/53304","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Interdisciplinary evaluation of older adults' health care is a priority in the prevention of chronic health conditions and maintenance of daily functioning. While many studies evaluate different physical performance tests (PPTs) from a retrospective view in predicting mortality or cardiopulmonary health, it remains unclear which of the commonly used PPTs is the most effective at evaluating the current health of older adults. Additionally, the time and participant burden for each PPT must be considered when planning and implementing them for clinical or research purposes.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This cross-sectional study aimed to determine how elements of overall physical capacity, performance, and other nongait factors in older adults affect the results of 3 commonly used tests: the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB), 6-minute walk test (6MWT), and Incremental Shuttle Walk Test (ISWT).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 53 community-dwelling older adults met the inclusion and exclusion criteria (mean age 77.47, SD 7.25 years; n=41, 77% female; and n=21, 40% Hispanic). This study evaluated older adults using 3 different PPTs including the SPPB, 6MWT, and ISWT, as well as constructed multiple linear regression models with measures of physical activity, static balance, and fear of falling (FoF). The nongait measures included 7 days of physical activity monitoring using the ActiGraph GT9X Link instrument, objective measurement of static balance using the BTrackS Balance System, and FoF using the short Fall Efficacy Scale-International.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The models revealed that the complete SPPB provided the most comprehensive value, as indicated by a greater R<sup>2</sup> value (0.523), and that performance on the SPPB was predicted by both moderate to vigorous physical activity (P=.01) and FoF (P<.001). The ISWT was predicted by moderate to vigorous physical activity (P=.02), BMI (P=.02), and FoF (P=.006) and had a similar R<sup>2</sup> value (0.517), whereas the gait component of the SPPB (P=.001) and 6MWT (P<.001) was predicted by only FoF and had lower R<sup>2</sup> values (0.375 and 0.228, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results indicated the value of a multicomponent, comprehensive test, such as the SPPB, in evaluating the health of older adults. Additionally, a comparison of the 2 field walking tests (ISWT and 6MWT) further distinguished the ISWT as more responsive to overall health in older adults. In comparing these commonly used PPTs, clinicians and researchers in the field can determine and select the most optimal test to evaluate older adults in communities and research settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":51757,"journal":{"name":"Interactive Journal of Medical Research","volume":"13 ","pages":"e53304"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11645506/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Interactive Journal of Medical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/53304","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Interdisciplinary evaluation of older adults' health care is a priority in the prevention of chronic health conditions and maintenance of daily functioning. While many studies evaluate different physical performance tests (PPTs) from a retrospective view in predicting mortality or cardiopulmonary health, it remains unclear which of the commonly used PPTs is the most effective at evaluating the current health of older adults. Additionally, the time and participant burden for each PPT must be considered when planning and implementing them for clinical or research purposes.

Objective: This cross-sectional study aimed to determine how elements of overall physical capacity, performance, and other nongait factors in older adults affect the results of 3 commonly used tests: the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB), 6-minute walk test (6MWT), and Incremental Shuttle Walk Test (ISWT).

Methods: A total of 53 community-dwelling older adults met the inclusion and exclusion criteria (mean age 77.47, SD 7.25 years; n=41, 77% female; and n=21, 40% Hispanic). This study evaluated older adults using 3 different PPTs including the SPPB, 6MWT, and ISWT, as well as constructed multiple linear regression models with measures of physical activity, static balance, and fear of falling (FoF). The nongait measures included 7 days of physical activity monitoring using the ActiGraph GT9X Link instrument, objective measurement of static balance using the BTrackS Balance System, and FoF using the short Fall Efficacy Scale-International.

Results: The models revealed that the complete SPPB provided the most comprehensive value, as indicated by a greater R2 value (0.523), and that performance on the SPPB was predicted by both moderate to vigorous physical activity (P=.01) and FoF (P<.001). The ISWT was predicted by moderate to vigorous physical activity (P=.02), BMI (P=.02), and FoF (P=.006) and had a similar R2 value (0.517), whereas the gait component of the SPPB (P=.001) and 6MWT (P<.001) was predicted by only FoF and had lower R2 values (0.375 and 0.228, respectively).

Conclusions: The results indicated the value of a multicomponent, comprehensive test, such as the SPPB, in evaluating the health of older adults. Additionally, a comparison of the 2 field walking tests (ISWT and 6MWT) further distinguished the ISWT as more responsive to overall health in older adults. In comparing these commonly used PPTs, clinicians and researchers in the field can determine and select the most optimal test to evaluate older adults in communities and research settings.

评估老年人健康的常用体能测试:横断面研究
背景:老年人保健的跨学科评估是预防慢性健康状况和维持日常功能的优先事项。虽然许多研究从预测死亡率或心肺健康的回顾性角度评估不同的身体机能测试(PPTs),但目前尚不清楚哪种常用的PPTs在评估老年人当前健康方面最有效。此外,在计划和实施临床或研究目的时,必须考虑每个PPT的时间和参与者负担。目的:本横断面研究旨在确定老年人整体体能、运动表现和其他非运动因素如何影响三种常用测试的结果:短时间体能测试(SPPB)、6分钟步行测试(6MWT)和增量穿梭步行测试(ISWT)。方法:53例社区居住老年人符合纳入和排除标准(平均年龄77.47岁,SD 7.25岁;N =41, 77%为女性;n=21,西班牙裔占40%)。本研究使用SPPB、6MWT和ISWT 3种不同的pts对老年人进行评估,并构建了包含体力活动、静态平衡和跌倒恐惧(FoF)指标的多元线性回归模型。非运动测量包括使用ActiGraph GT9X Link仪器进行7天的身体活动监测,使用BTrackS平衡系统进行静态平衡的客观测量,以及使用short - Fall Efficacy Scale-International进行FoF测量。结果:模型显示,完整SPPB提供了最全面的值,R2值较大(0.523),并且SPPB的表现可以通过中高强度运动(P= 0.01)和FoF (P2值(0.517)预测,而SPPB的步态分量(P= 0.001)和6MWT (P2值分别为0.375和0.228)预测。结论:SPPB等多组分综合检测方法在老年人健康评价中具有一定的应用价值。此外,对两种野外步行测试(ISWT和6MWT)的比较进一步表明,ISWT对老年人的整体健康状况更敏感。通过比较这些常用的PPTs,临床医生和研究人员可以确定并选择最优的测试来评估社区和研究环境中的老年人。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Interactive Journal of Medical Research
Interactive Journal of Medical Research MEDICINE, RESEARCH & EXPERIMENTAL-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
45
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信