居住在城市和农村社区的菲律宾老年人的流动性表现:一项初步研究。

Pub Date : 2019-12-01 Epub Date: 2018-12-11 DOI:10.1142/S1013702519500082
Frances Rom Lunar, Jan Paul Marquez, Francine Kier Quianzon, Ben Joshua Policarpio, Leslie Anne Santelices, Mariah Kristine Velasco, Ramielle Joie Quinto, Edward James Gorgon
{"title":"居住在城市和农村社区的菲律宾老年人的流动性表现:一项初步研究。","authors":"Frances Rom Lunar,&nbsp;Jan Paul Marquez,&nbsp;Francine Kier Quianzon,&nbsp;Ben Joshua Policarpio,&nbsp;Leslie Anne Santelices,&nbsp;Mariah Kristine Velasco,&nbsp;Ramielle Joie Quinto,&nbsp;Edward James Gorgon","doi":"10.1142/S1013702519500082","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The impact of residential setting on the performance of older adults on commonly used instruments of mobility has not been closely investigated.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to (1) explore whether mobility test performance differed between those who lived in urban and rural communities, and (2) report preliminary reference values for these tests according to residential setting.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study used a descriptive design. Individuals who were aged 60 years and above, had no significant disability, and resided in urban and rural areas in the Philippines <math><mo>(</mo> <mi>n</mi> <mo>=</mo> <mn>180</mn> <mo>)</mo></math> , participated in the study. Researchers measured mobility performance using the 10-Meter Walk Test (10MWT) (both comfortable gait velocity (CGV) and fast gait velocity (FGV)), Five Times Sit to Stand Test (FTSST), and Six-Minute Walk Test (6MWT). Preliminary reference values for the mobility tests were presented as means, standard deviations, and 95% confidence intervals. Scores were compared based on residential setting (urban versus rural).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Urban-dwellers scored consistently better compared to their rural counterparts on the CGV, FGV, FTSST, and 6MWT using independent samples <math><mi>t</mi></math> -test <math><mo>(</mo> <mi>p</mi> <mo><</mo> <mn>0</mn> <mo>.</mo> <mn>001</mn> <mo>)</mo></math> . Data were further divided according to age and sex, and comparison of the mobility test scores between urban- and rural-dwellers within each subgroup showed similar differences <math><mo>(</mo> <mi>p</mi> <mo><</mo> <mn>0</mn> <mo>.</mo> <mn>01</mn> <mo>)</mo></math> .</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Results provide preliminary evidence for the influence of residential setting on the mobility test performance of Filipino older adults. The study provides a good starting point for confirmatory research with a representative sample to (1) illustrate differences in mobility performance according to residential setting, (2) investigate how specific factors associated with residential settings contribute to differences in mobility performance, and (3) determine the extent to which clinicians should consider an older person's residential setting when interpreting mobility test results.</p>","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2019-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1142/S1013702519500082","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mobility performance among community-dwelling older Filipinos who lived in urban and rural settings: A preliminary study.\",\"authors\":\"Frances Rom Lunar,&nbsp;Jan Paul Marquez,&nbsp;Francine Kier Quianzon,&nbsp;Ben Joshua Policarpio,&nbsp;Leslie Anne Santelices,&nbsp;Mariah Kristine Velasco,&nbsp;Ramielle Joie Quinto,&nbsp;Edward James Gorgon\",\"doi\":\"10.1142/S1013702519500082\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The impact of residential setting on the performance of older adults on commonly used instruments of mobility has not been closely investigated.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to (1) explore whether mobility test performance differed between those who lived in urban and rural communities, and (2) report preliminary reference values for these tests according to residential setting.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The study used a descriptive design. Individuals who were aged 60 years and above, had no significant disability, and resided in urban and rural areas in the Philippines <math><mo>(</mo> <mi>n</mi> <mo>=</mo> <mn>180</mn> <mo>)</mo></math> , participated in the study. Researchers measured mobility performance using the 10-Meter Walk Test (10MWT) (both comfortable gait velocity (CGV) and fast gait velocity (FGV)), Five Times Sit to Stand Test (FTSST), and Six-Minute Walk Test (6MWT). Preliminary reference values for the mobility tests were presented as means, standard deviations, and 95% confidence intervals. Scores were compared based on residential setting (urban versus rural).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Urban-dwellers scored consistently better compared to their rural counterparts on the CGV, FGV, FTSST, and 6MWT using independent samples <math><mi>t</mi></math> -test <math><mo>(</mo> <mi>p</mi> <mo><</mo> <mn>0</mn> <mo>.</mo> <mn>001</mn> <mo>)</mo></math> . Data were further divided according to age and sex, and comparison of the mobility test scores between urban- and rural-dwellers within each subgroup showed similar differences <math><mo>(</mo> <mi>p</mi> <mo><</mo> <mn>0</mn> <mo>.</mo> <mn>01</mn> <mo>)</mo></math> .</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Results provide preliminary evidence for the influence of residential setting on the mobility test performance of Filipino older adults. The study provides a good starting point for confirmatory research with a representative sample to (1) illustrate differences in mobility performance according to residential setting, (2) investigate how specific factors associated with residential settings contribute to differences in mobility performance, and (3) determine the extent to which clinicians should consider an older person's residential setting when interpreting mobility test results.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":0,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1142/S1013702519500082\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1142/S1013702519500082\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2018/12/11 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1142/S1013702519500082","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2018/12/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

背景:居住环境对老年人使用常用活动工具的影响尚未得到深入研究。目的:本研究旨在(1)探讨居住在城市和农村社区的人的流动性测试成绩是否存在差异,(2)根据居住环境报告这些测试的初步参考值。方法:本研究采用描述性设计。年龄在60岁及以上,无明显残疾,居住在菲律宾城市和农村地区的个体(n = 180)参加了这项研究。研究人员使用10米步行测试(10MWT)(舒适步态速度(CGV)和快速步态速度(FGV)),五次坐立测试(FTSST)和六分钟步行测试(6MWT)来测量移动性能。流动性试验的初步参考值以平均值、标准差和95%置信区间表示。分数是根据居住环境(城市与农村)进行比较的。结果:城市居民在CGV、FGV、FTSST和6MWT上的得分始终优于农村居民,采用独立样本t检验(p < 0.05)。001)。数据进一步按年龄和性别划分,每个亚组内城市和农村居民流动性测试分数的比较显示出相似的差异(p < 0.05)。结论:研究结果为居住环境对菲律宾老年人行动能力测验成绩的影响提供了初步证据。该研究为具有代表性的验证性研究提供了一个良好的起点,以(1)说明不同居住环境下老年人活动能力表现的差异,(2)调查与居住环境相关的特定因素如何导致活动能力表现的差异,以及(3)确定临床医生在解释老年人活动能力测试结果时应考虑老年人居住环境的程度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Mobility performance among community-dwelling older Filipinos who lived in urban and rural settings: A preliminary study.

Mobility performance among community-dwelling older Filipinos who lived in urban and rural settings: A preliminary study.

Mobility performance among community-dwelling older Filipinos who lived in urban and rural settings: A preliminary study.

分享
查看原文
Mobility performance among community-dwelling older Filipinos who lived in urban and rural settings: A preliminary study.

Background: The impact of residential setting on the performance of older adults on commonly used instruments of mobility has not been closely investigated.

Objective: This study aimed to (1) explore whether mobility test performance differed between those who lived in urban and rural communities, and (2) report preliminary reference values for these tests according to residential setting.

Methods: The study used a descriptive design. Individuals who were aged 60 years and above, had no significant disability, and resided in urban and rural areas in the Philippines ( n = 180 ) , participated in the study. Researchers measured mobility performance using the 10-Meter Walk Test (10MWT) (both comfortable gait velocity (CGV) and fast gait velocity (FGV)), Five Times Sit to Stand Test (FTSST), and Six-Minute Walk Test (6MWT). Preliminary reference values for the mobility tests were presented as means, standard deviations, and 95% confidence intervals. Scores were compared based on residential setting (urban versus rural).

Results: Urban-dwellers scored consistently better compared to their rural counterparts on the CGV, FGV, FTSST, and 6MWT using independent samples t -test ( p < 0 . 001 ) . Data were further divided according to age and sex, and comparison of the mobility test scores between urban- and rural-dwellers within each subgroup showed similar differences ( p < 0 . 01 ) .

Conclusion: Results provide preliminary evidence for the influence of residential setting on the mobility test performance of Filipino older adults. The study provides a good starting point for confirmatory research with a representative sample to (1) illustrate differences in mobility performance according to residential setting, (2) investigate how specific factors associated with residential settings contribute to differences in mobility performance, and (3) determine the extent to which clinicians should consider an older person's residential setting when interpreting mobility test results.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
×
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