scholarly journals Mobility in community-dwelling older adults; what are its determinants?

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Wiebren Zijlstra ◽  
Eleftheria Giannouli

Abstract Background Based on a conceptual framework, Kuspinar and colleagues analysed life-space mobility in community-dwelling older adults. However, a number of earlier mobility studies that used the same framework remained undiscussed. This correspondence article addresses similarities and differences between these studies, as well as highlight issues that need to be addressed to improve our understanding of mobility determinants in older adults. Findings Despite differences in methodological approach as well as in detailed results, the studies share one important outcome: regardless of the specific choice of potential mobility determinants, only a low to moderate proportion of mobility could be explained. Conclusions Our present understanding of the determinants of mobility in community-dwelling older adults is limited. A consistent terminology that takes into account the different aspects of mobility; the use of objective methods to assess real-life mobility; and monitoring changes in real-life mobility in response to interventions will contribute to furthering our understanding of mobility determinants.

Author(s):  
Eleftheria Giannouli ◽  
Michelle Pasquale Fillekes ◽  
Sabato Mellone ◽  
Robert Weibel ◽  
Otmar Bock ◽  
...  

Abstract Background 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. Methods Data were obtained in two study waves with a total sample of n = 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. Results 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. Conclusions 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.


2020 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yiru Wang ◽  
Rachana Gangwani ◽  
Lakshmi Kannan ◽  
Alison Schenone ◽  
Edward Wang ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S472-S473
Author(s):  
Chek Hooi Wong ◽  
Pey June Tan ◽  
Mei Sian Chong ◽  
Jagadish U Mallya ◽  
Mimaika L Ginting ◽  
...  

Abstract Independent outdoor mobility is important to community-dwelling older adults as it enables reach and access to resources for everyday activities, but this becomes increasingly challenging with the progressive decline in physical performance in ageing. We aim to understand the relationship between Indoor (IGS) and Real-Life Outdoor Gait Speed (OGS) with objectively-measured geographic life-space extent and outdoor mobility among community-ambulant older adults in Singapore. Thirty-three participants aged ≥55 years living in three neighbourhoods wore hybrid mobility trackers continuously for 7 days. Baseline 6-metre IGS was measured with a stopwatch, while OGS was from outdoor accelerometer data. Nodes were defined as significant places visited for ≥5 minutes. Multiple linear regressions examined each association between IGS and OGS on geographic life-space extent and outdoor mobility measures adjusting for confounders. Participants’ mean age was 69.2±7.1 years with mean IGS and OGS of 1.11m/s and 0.85m/s respectively. They spent on average 4.7 hours/day out-of-home with the majority (57%) of nodes located within 500m from home. There were no significant associations between gait speeds and geographic life-space measures. Higher OGS was associated with higher total number of nodes/week while higher IGS was significantly associated with lower percentage of nodes within 500m from home. Our findings highlighted the complexity and multi-dimensionality of independent outdoor mobility as both gait speed performances were not significantly associated with geographic life-space extent, but rather with spatiotemporal interaction and opportunities to access locations for older adults’ daily activities.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document