Giannouli Eleftheria, Fillekes Michelle Pasquale, Mellone Sabato, Weibel Robert, Bock Otmar, Zijlstra Wiebren
1Institute of Movement and Sport Gerontology, German Sport University Cologne, Am Sportpark Müngersdorf 6, 50933 Cologne, Germany.
2University Research Priority Program 'Dynamics of Healthy Aging', University of Zurich, Andreasstrasse 15, 8050 Zurich, Switzerland.
Eur Rev Aging Phys Act. 2019 Nov 3;16:19. doi: 10.1186/s11556-019-0225-2. eCollection 2019.
Reduced mobility is associated with a plethora of adverse outcomes. To support older adults in maintaining their independence, it first is important to have deeper knowledge of factors that impact on their mobility. Based on a framework that encompasses demographical, environmental, physical, cognitive, psychological and social domains, this study explores predictors of different aspects of real-life mobility in community-dwelling older adults.
Data were obtained in two study waves with a total sample of = 154. Real-life mobility (physical activity-based mobility and life-space mobility) was assessed over one week using smartphones. Active and gait time and number of steps were calculated from inertial sensor data, and life-space area, total distance, and action range were calculated from GPS data. Demographic measures included age, gender and education. Physical functioning was assessed based on measures of cardiovascular fitness, leg and handgrip strength, balance and gait function; cognitive functioning was assessed based on measures of attention and executive function. Psychological and social assessments included measures of self-efficacy, depression, rigidity, arousal, and loneliness, sociableness, perceived help availability, perceived ageism and social networks. Maximum temperature was used to assess weather conditions on monitoring days.
Multiple regression analyses indicated just physical and psychological measures accounted for significant but rather low proportions of variance (5-30%) in real-life mobility. Strength measures were retained in most of the regression models. Cognitive and social measures did not remain as significant predictors in any of the models.
In older adults without mobility limitations, real-life mobility was associated primarily with measures of physical functioning. Psychological functioning also seemed to play a role for real-life mobility, though the associations were more pronounced for physical activity-based mobility than life-space mobility. Further factors should be assessed in order to achieve more conclusive results about predictors of real-life mobility in community-dwelling older adults.
活动能力下降与大量不良后果相关。为帮助老年人维持其独立性,深入了解影响其活动能力的因素至关重要。基于一个涵盖人口统计学、环境、身体、认知、心理和社会领域的框架,本研究探讨社区居住老年人现实生活中不同方面活动能力的预测因素。
在两个研究阶段获取数据,总样本量为n = 154。使用智能手机在一周内评估现实生活中的活动能力(基于身体活动的活动能力和生活空间活动能力)。从惯性传感器数据计算活跃时间、步态时间和步数,从GPS数据计算生活空间面积、总距离和行动范围。人口统计学指标包括年龄、性别和教育程度。基于心血管健康、腿部和握力、平衡和步态功能的测量评估身体功能;基于注意力和执行功能的测量评估认知功能。心理和社会评估包括自我效能感、抑郁、僵化、唤醒、孤独感、社交性、感知到的帮助可用性、感知到的年龄歧视和社会网络的测量。使用最高温度评估监测日的天气状况。
多元回归分析表明,仅身体和心理测量指标在现实生活活动能力中占显著但比例较低的方差(5 - 30%)。力量测量指标在大多数回归模型中被保留。认知和社会测量指标在任何模型中都未作为显著预测因素保留。
在没有活动能力限制的老年人中,现实生活活动能力主要与身体功能测量指标相关。心理功能似乎也对现实生活活动能力起作用,尽管基于身体活动的活动能力的关联比生活空间活动能力更明显。为了获得关于社区居住老年人现实生活活动能力预测因素更确凿的结果,应评估更多因素。