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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |