Search

Introduction: Physical activity (PA) is critical for disease prevention and maintaining functional ability with aging. Despite this, as many as 50% of older adults in populations worldwide are considered insufficiently active. There is a recognized need to mobilize policies targeted toward modifiable determinants of healthy aging like PA. This umbrella review aimed to summarize the evidence for determinants of PA in community-dwelling older adults., Methods: A research librarian searched six databases. Systematic and scoping reviews were included if they investigated community-dwelling people with a mean age of 60 + years and examined a relationship between a determinant and any type of PA. Two independent reviewers screened and extracted data from all reviews. JBI methodology and Critical Appraisal Checklist for Systematic Reviews and Research Syntheses were followed and information on the quality of the evidence was extracted., Results: From 17,277 records screened,11 reviews representing > 300 unique primary papers were ultimately included. Only 6% of studies included in all reviews had longitudinal designs. Included studies used a large variety of PA measures, with 76% using only self-report, 15% using only direct measures (e.g., accelerometry), 3% using both types, and 6% with no outcome measure reported. Only four reviews provided a definition of PA and there was substantial inconsistency in the way PA was categorised. Community level influences, which only included the physical environment, were the most commonly assessed (6/11) with more than 70% of the summarized relationships demonstrating null associations. Three out of four reviews reported a positive relationship between walkability and PA in general community-dwelling older adults. There was also evidence supporting relationships between presence of social support for PA, younger age, and men having higher PA from a single systematic review. None of the included reviews assessed the quality of evidence but over 60% performed a risk of bias assessment., Conclusions: Walkability, age, gender, and social support for PA were the most supported PA determinants identified. Further research should focus on interpersonal and intrapersonal influences and incorporate direct measures of PA with clear operational definitions. There is a need for longitudinal study designs to further understand determinants of PA behaviour trajectories., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Objective: The objective of this review is to determine the effect of physical activity interventions delivered via smart technology compared with face-to-face interventions for improving physical activity and physical function in older adults., Introduction: Physical activity is a modifiable risk factor for multiple noncommunicable diseases and reduces the risk of premature mortality. Despite this, one in four adults does not meet recommended levels of physical activity. This pattern of inactivity increases with age. Smart technology, such as wearables, tablets, or laptops, is one solution for improving physical activity. Research has shown that different smart technology solutions can increase physical activity in older adults. While individual studies support smart technology to increase physical activity, there are no systematic reviews comparing the effects of smart technology with traditional face-to-face physical activity interventions., Inclusion Criteria: We will include randomized controlled trials of physical activity interventions delivered via smart technology (eg, wearables, tablets, computers) compared with face-to-face (ie, in person) interventions for community-dwelling older adults aged 60 years or older., Methods: We will search four databases (AMED, CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE) from inception for relevant studies. All abstracts and full texts will be screened independently and in duplicate. Risk of bias, data extraction, and quality assessment will be completed in the same manner. If possible, a meta-analysis will be performed of the primary outcomes of physical activity, physical function, and adherence rate. Subgroup analyses will be conducted by type of physical activity, and type of smart technology, where possible., Systematic Review Registration Number: PROSPERO CRD42020135232., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2021 JBI.)

Background and aims: Performance-based tests of mobility or physical function such as the Timed Up and Go (TUG), gait speed, chair-rise, and single-leg stance (SLS) are often administered using different protocols in aging populations, however, the reliability of their assessment protocols is not often considered. The purpose of this study was to examine the reliabilities of frequently used assessment protocols for the TUG, gait speed, chair-rise, and SLS in different age groups. Methods: We administered the following assessment protocols in an age-stratified (50–64, 65–74, 75+ years) sample of participants (N = 147) from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA): TUG fast pace and TUG normal pace: TUG-cognitive counting backwards by ones and counting back by threes, gait speed with 3-m and 4-m course, chair-rise with arms crossed and allowing the use of arms, and SLS using preferred leg or both legs—on two occasions within 1 week. We assessed the relative (intra-class correlation) and absolute reliability (standard error of measurement, SEM and minimal detectable change, MDC) for each protocol variation and provided recommendations based on relative reliability. Results: For participants aged 50–64 years, our results suggest better reliability for TUG fast-pace compared with normal-pace (ICC and 95% CI 0.70; 0.41–0.85 versus 0.38; 0.12–0.59). The reliability values for 3-m gait speed were potentially higher than for 4-m gait speed (ICC 0.75; 0.67–0.82 versus 0.64; 0.54–0.73) and values for chair-rise suggested better reliability allowing participants to use their arms than with arms crossed (ICC 0.79; 0.66–0.86 versus 0.64; 0.45–0.77) for participants overall. For participants aged 75+ years, ICCs for SLS with the preferred leg showed better reliability than for both legs (ICC = 0.62–0.79 versus 0.30–0.39). Conclusions and discussion: These reliability data and the recommendations can help guide the selection of the most appropriate performance-based test protocols for measuring mobility in middle-aged and older community-dwelling adults. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Guidelines for fall prevention in older adults recommend mobility screening for fall risk assessment; however, there is no consensus on which test to use and at what cutoff. This study aimed to determine the accuracy and optimal cut-off values of commonly used mobility tests for predicting falls in the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging (CLSA). Methods Mobility tests at baseline included the Timed Up and Go (TUG), Single Leg Stance (SLS), chair-rise and gait speed. Inclusion criteria were: age ≥ 65 years and meeting first-level fall screening criteria (i.e. history of a fall or mobility problem) at baseline. Accuracy of fall prediction at 18-months for each test was measured by the area under the receiver operating curve (AUC). Results Of 1,121 participants that met inclusion criteria (mean age 75.2 ± 5.9 years; 66.6% women), 218 (19.4%) reported ≥one fall at 18 months. None of the tests achieved acceptable accuracy for identifying individuals with ≥one fall at follow-up. Among women 65–74 and 75–85 years, the TUG identified recurrent fallers (≥two falls) with optimal cut-off scores of 14.1 and 12.9 s (both AUCs 0.70), respectively. Among men 65–74 years, only the SLS showed acceptable accuracy (AUC 0.85) for identifying recurrent fallers with an optimal cutoff of 3.6 s. Conclusions Our findings indicate that commonly used mobility tests do not have sufficient discriminability to identify fallers in a population-based sample of community-dwelling older adults. The TUG and SLS can identify recurrent fallers; however, their accuracy and cut-off values vary by age and sex. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To evaluate the acceptability, reliability (inter- and intrarater), and validity (convergent, known groups, and predictive) of virtually administered gait speed tests for community-dwelling older adults. A prospective cohort study was performed, tracking health outcomes for a year. The 3-m gait speed test at usual and fast pace was administered to community-dwelling older adults over Zoom. To examine acceptability, participants completed questionnaires regarding telehealth usability and experience. Virtual gait speed tests were administered at baseline and 24 to 72 hours later to evaluate reliability. Self-report mobility measures were used to examine convergent and known-groups validity. Participants' health outcomes were tracked for a year to evaluate predictive validity. Sixty participants completed the baseline assessment and 52 completed the second assessment. Participants reported an overall positive experience with the test. Intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability ranged from 0.79 to 0.90. For convergent validity, correlations >0.30 were found predominantly for usual gait speed with self-report mobility measures. Both the usual- and fast-gait speed were able to discriminate between difficulty walking and gait aid use. Usual gait speed was able to predict specialist and family doctor visits and fast gait speed was able to predict rehabilitation specialist visits over 1 year. Our findings demonstrate support for the acceptability, reliability, and validity of virtually administered gait speed tests for community-dwelling older adults. Although future studies are needed to examine the validity of virtual gait speed tests in larger and more diverse samples to improve generalizability of results, clinicians and researchers can virtually administer 3-m gait speed tests with confidence that scores are trustworthy and reflect older adults' mobility. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]