Cargando…

A comparison between an ICT tool and a traditional physical measure for frailty evaluation in older adults

BACKGROUND: Frailty is a clinical condition among older adults defined as the loss of resources in one or more domains (i.e., physical, psychological and social domains) of individual functioning. In frail subjects emergency situations and mobility levels need to be carefully monitored. This study a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mulasso, Anna, Brustio, Paolo Riccardo, Rainoldi, Alberto, Zia, Gianluca, Feletti, Luca, N’dja, Aurèle, Del Signore, Susanna, Poggiogalle, Eleonora, Luisi, Federica, Donini, Lorenzo Maria
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6427849/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30898096
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12877-019-1089-z
_version_ 1783405302897442816
author Mulasso, Anna
Brustio, Paolo Riccardo
Rainoldi, Alberto
Zia, Gianluca
Feletti, Luca
N’dja, Aurèle
Del Signore, Susanna
Poggiogalle, Eleonora
Luisi, Federica
Donini, Lorenzo Maria
author_facet Mulasso, Anna
Brustio, Paolo Riccardo
Rainoldi, Alberto
Zia, Gianluca
Feletti, Luca
N’dja, Aurèle
Del Signore, Susanna
Poggiogalle, Eleonora
Luisi, Federica
Donini, Lorenzo Maria
author_sort Mulasso, Anna
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Frailty is a clinical condition among older adults defined as the loss of resources in one or more domains (i.e., physical, psychological and social domains) of individual functioning. In frail subjects emergency situations and mobility levels need to be carefully monitored. This study aimed to: i) evaluate differences in the mobility index (MI) provided by ADAMO system, an innovative remote monitoring device for older adults; ii) compare the association of the MI and a traditional physical measure with frailty. METHODS: Twenty-five community-dwelling older adults (71 ± 6 years; 60% women) wore ADAMO continuously for a week. The time percentage spent in Low, Moderate and Vigorous Activities was assessed using ADAMO system. Walking ability and frailty were measured using the 400 m walk test and the Tilburg Frailty Indicator, respectively. RESULTS: Controlling for age and gender, the ANCOVA showed that frail and robust participants were different for Low (frail = 58.8%, robust = 42.0%, p < 0.001), Moderate (frail = 25.5%, robust = 33.8%, p = 0.008), and Vigorous Activity (frail = 15.7%, robust = 24.2%, p = 0.035). Using cluster analysis, participants were divided into two groups, one with higher and one with lower mobility. Controlling for age and gender, linear regression showed that the MI clusters were associated with total (β = 0.571, p = 0.002), physical (β = 0.381, p = 0.031) and social (β = 0.652, p < 0.001) frailty; and the 400 m walk test was just associated with total (β = 0.404, p = 0.043) and physical frailty (β = 0.668, p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: ADAMO system seems to be a suitable time tracking that allows to measure mobility levels in a non-intrusive way providing wider information on individual health status and specifically on frailty. For the frail individuals with an important loss of resources in physical domain, this innovative device may represent a considerable help in preventing physical consequences and in monitoring functional status.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6427849
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-64278492019-04-01 A comparison between an ICT tool and a traditional physical measure for frailty evaluation in older adults Mulasso, Anna Brustio, Paolo Riccardo Rainoldi, Alberto Zia, Gianluca Feletti, Luca N’dja, Aurèle Del Signore, Susanna Poggiogalle, Eleonora Luisi, Federica Donini, Lorenzo Maria BMC Geriatr Research Article BACKGROUND: Frailty is a clinical condition among older adults defined as the loss of resources in one or more domains (i.e., physical, psychological and social domains) of individual functioning. In frail subjects emergency situations and mobility levels need to be carefully monitored. This study aimed to: i) evaluate differences in the mobility index (MI) provided by ADAMO system, an innovative remote monitoring device for older adults; ii) compare the association of the MI and a traditional physical measure with frailty. METHODS: Twenty-five community-dwelling older adults (71 ± 6 years; 60% women) wore ADAMO continuously for a week. The time percentage spent in Low, Moderate and Vigorous Activities was assessed using ADAMO system. Walking ability and frailty were measured using the 400 m walk test and the Tilburg Frailty Indicator, respectively. RESULTS: Controlling for age and gender, the ANCOVA showed that frail and robust participants were different for Low (frail = 58.8%, robust = 42.0%, p < 0.001), Moderate (frail = 25.5%, robust = 33.8%, p = 0.008), and Vigorous Activity (frail = 15.7%, robust = 24.2%, p = 0.035). Using cluster analysis, participants were divided into two groups, one with higher and one with lower mobility. Controlling for age and gender, linear regression showed that the MI clusters were associated with total (β = 0.571, p = 0.002), physical (β = 0.381, p = 0.031) and social (β = 0.652, p < 0.001) frailty; and the 400 m walk test was just associated with total (β = 0.404, p = 0.043) and physical frailty (β = 0.668, p = 0.002). CONCLUSION: ADAMO system seems to be a suitable time tracking that allows to measure mobility levels in a non-intrusive way providing wider information on individual health status and specifically on frailty. For the frail individuals with an important loss of resources in physical domain, this innovative device may represent a considerable help in preventing physical consequences and in monitoring functional status. BioMed Central 2019-03-21 /pmc/articles/PMC6427849/ /pubmed/30898096 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12877-019-1089-z Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Mulasso, Anna
Brustio, Paolo Riccardo
Rainoldi, Alberto
Zia, Gianluca
Feletti, Luca
N’dja, Aurèle
Del Signore, Susanna
Poggiogalle, Eleonora
Luisi, Federica
Donini, Lorenzo Maria
A comparison between an ICT tool and a traditional physical measure for frailty evaluation in older adults
title A comparison between an ICT tool and a traditional physical measure for frailty evaluation in older adults
title_full A comparison between an ICT tool and a traditional physical measure for frailty evaluation in older adults
title_fullStr A comparison between an ICT tool and a traditional physical measure for frailty evaluation in older adults
title_full_unstemmed A comparison between an ICT tool and a traditional physical measure for frailty evaluation in older adults
title_short A comparison between an ICT tool and a traditional physical measure for frailty evaluation in older adults
title_sort comparison between an ict tool and a traditional physical measure for frailty evaluation in older adults
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6427849/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30898096
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12877-019-1089-z
work_keys_str_mv AT mulassoanna acomparisonbetweenanicttoolandatraditionalphysicalmeasureforfrailtyevaluationinolderadults
AT brustiopaoloriccardo acomparisonbetweenanicttoolandatraditionalphysicalmeasureforfrailtyevaluationinolderadults
AT rainoldialberto acomparisonbetweenanicttoolandatraditionalphysicalmeasureforfrailtyevaluationinolderadults
AT ziagianluca acomparisonbetweenanicttoolandatraditionalphysicalmeasureforfrailtyevaluationinolderadults
AT felettiluca acomparisonbetweenanicttoolandatraditionalphysicalmeasureforfrailtyevaluationinolderadults
AT ndjaaurele acomparisonbetweenanicttoolandatraditionalphysicalmeasureforfrailtyevaluationinolderadults
AT delsignoresusanna acomparisonbetweenanicttoolandatraditionalphysicalmeasureforfrailtyevaluationinolderadults
AT poggiogalleeleonora acomparisonbetweenanicttoolandatraditionalphysicalmeasureforfrailtyevaluationinolderadults
AT luisifederica acomparisonbetweenanicttoolandatraditionalphysicalmeasureforfrailtyevaluationinolderadults
AT doninilorenzomaria acomparisonbetweenanicttoolandatraditionalphysicalmeasureforfrailtyevaluationinolderadults
AT mulassoanna comparisonbetweenanicttoolandatraditionalphysicalmeasureforfrailtyevaluationinolderadults
AT brustiopaoloriccardo comparisonbetweenanicttoolandatraditionalphysicalmeasureforfrailtyevaluationinolderadults
AT rainoldialberto comparisonbetweenanicttoolandatraditionalphysicalmeasureforfrailtyevaluationinolderadults
AT ziagianluca comparisonbetweenanicttoolandatraditionalphysicalmeasureforfrailtyevaluationinolderadults
AT felettiluca comparisonbetweenanicttoolandatraditionalphysicalmeasureforfrailtyevaluationinolderadults
AT ndjaaurele comparisonbetweenanicttoolandatraditionalphysicalmeasureforfrailtyevaluationinolderadults
AT delsignoresusanna comparisonbetweenanicttoolandatraditionalphysicalmeasureforfrailtyevaluationinolderadults
AT poggiogalleeleonora comparisonbetweenanicttoolandatraditionalphysicalmeasureforfrailtyevaluationinolderadults
AT luisifederica comparisonbetweenanicttoolandatraditionalphysicalmeasureforfrailtyevaluationinolderadults
AT doninilorenzomaria comparisonbetweenanicttoolandatraditionalphysicalmeasureforfrailtyevaluationinolderadults