Creating and Validating a Shortened Version of the Community Balance and Mobility Scale for Application in People Who Are 61 to 70 Years of Age

Vegetable Gardening and Health Outcomes in Older Cancer Survivors: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Cancer survivors experience accelerated functional decline that threatens independence and quality of life. Previous studies have suggested that vegetable gardening may improve diet, physical activity, and physical function in this vulnerable population, which comprises more than 5% of the US population.

Objective

To assess whether diet, physical activity and functioning, and other outcomes improved in older cancer survivors assigned to a vegetable gardening intervention compared with a waitlist.

Design, Setting, and Participants

From May 11, 2016, to May 2, 2022, a 2-arm, assessor-blinded, crossover-designed, intent-to-treat, randomized clinical trial was conducted at cancer survivors' homes across Alabama. Medicare-eligible survivors of cancers with 5-year survival of 60% or more were registry ascertained and screened for suboptimal vegetable and fruit consumption (<5 servings per day), physical activity (<150 moderate-to-vigorous minutes per week), and physical function (36-Item Short Form Health Survey [SF-36] subscale score ≤90). Consented participants underwent baseline assessments, were randomly assigned to intervention or waitlisted arms, and were reassessed at 1-year follow-up.

Intervention

One-year, home-based vegetable gardening intervention providing gardening supplies and mentorship by cooperative extension-certified master gardeners to plant and maintain spring, summer, and fall gardens. Waitlisted participants received the identical intervention after 12 months.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The main outcome was a composite index of improvements in self-reported vegetable and fruit consumption, physical activity, and physical function corroborated by plasma α-carotene levels, accelerometry, and physical performance assessments, respectively.

Results

Of 381 enrolled participants (mean [SD] age, 69.8 [6.4] years; range, 50-95 years; 263 [69.0%] female), 194 were assigned to the gardening intervention and 187 were waitlisted (attrition rates, 7.2% and 7.0%, respectively). Intent-to-treat analyses did not detect a significant improvement in the composite index of vegetable and fruit intake, moderate-vigorous physical activity, and physical function (intervention arm vs waitlisted arm, 4.5% vs 3.1%; P = .53) or between-arm differences in vegetable and fruit intake (mean difference, 0.3 [95% CI, -0.1 to 0.7] servings per day; P = .10). The intervention arm experienced a significant improvement in vegetable and fruit intake (mean increase, 0.3 [95% CI, 0.0-0.6] servings per day; P = .04). Significant improvements also were observed in the intervention arm vs waitlisted arm in physical performance (mean difference for 2-minute step test, 6.0 [95% CI, 0.8-11.2] steps; P = .03; for 30-second chair stand, 0.8 [95% CI, 0.1-1.5] repetitions; P = .02), perceived health (8.4 [95% CI, 3.0-13.9] points on a 100-point scale [higher scores indicate better health]; P = .003), and gut microbiome alpha diversity (84.1 [95% CI, 20.5-147.6] more observed species; P = .01). The COVID-19 pandemic significantly moderated effects (eg, odds of improvement in self-reported physical functioning were greater before vs during the pandemic: odds ratio, 2.17; 95% CI, 1.12-4.22; P = .02).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this randomized clinical trial including older cancer survivors, a vegetable gardening intervention did not significantly improve a composite index of diet, physical activity, and physical function; however, survivors assigned to the intervention had significantly increased vegetable and fruit consumption and, compared with waitlisted survivors, experienced significant improvements in perceived health and physical performance. Further study in broader populations and during pandemic-free periods is needed to determine definitive benefits.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02985411.

"TiC-TUG": technology in clinical practice using the instrumented timed up and go test-a scoping review

Digitized assessments have a considerable potential to guide clinicial decision making and monitor progress and disease trajectories. The Timed Up and Go test (TUG) has been long established for assessment in geriatric medicine and instrumented versions (iTUG) have been developed and validated. This scoping review includes studies that applied the iTUG and aims to identify use cases to show where and how iTUG assessment could guide interventions and clinical management. The literature search was limited to peer-reviewed studies that performed pre- and post-intervention measurements with a 3-meter TUG instrumented with body-worn technology in samples of at least 20 subjects aged 60+ years. Of 3018 identified articles 20 were included. Four clinical use cases were identified: stratification for subsequent therapy, monitoring of disease or treatment-associated changes and evaluation of interventions in patients with idiopathic normal pressure hydrocephalus (1), and patients with Parkinson's disease (2); monitoring after joint replacement surgery (3), and evaluation after different exercise and rehabilitation interventions (4). The included studies show diversity in terms of iTUG technology and procedures. The identified use cases highlight clinical relevance and high potential for the clinical application of the iTUG. A consensual approach as well as comprehensive reporting would help to further exploit the potential of the iTUG to support clinical management. Future studies should investigate the benefits of segmental iTUG analysis, responsiveness and participants' perspectives on clinically meaningful changes in iTUG.

Measures of attributes of locomotor capacity in older people: a systematic literature review following the COSMIN methodology

BACKGROUND

Locomotor capacity (LC) is an important domain of intrinsic capacity and key determinant of functional ability and well-being in older age. The United Nations Decade of Healthy Ageing (2021-2030) calls for strengthening data and research on healthy ageing, including the measurement of older persons' LC. To advance the measurement and monitoring of LC, there is pressing need to identify valid and reliable measures.

OBJECTIVE

To identify all the available tools that were validated for measurement of LC or of its specific attributes in older people and to assess the methodological quality of the studies and measurement properties of the tools.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

SETTING

Anywhere (Community-dwelling; long-term care facility; etc.).

SUBJECTS

Older people.

METHODS

We used highly sensitive search strategies to search the following databases: Medline, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL and PsycINFO. The study was conducted following the COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) methodology for systematic review of outcome measurement instruments.

RESULTS

A total of 125 studies were included, which assessed tools for balance (n = 84), muscle power (n = 12), muscle strength (n = 32, including four studies about tools for balance and muscle power) and endurance (n = 1). No studies on tools for muscle function, joint function, or locomotor capacity overall, were retrieved. We identified 69 clinician-report or objective assessment tools for balance, 30 for muscle strength, 12 for muscle power and 1 endurance assessment tool. The GRADE assessment of quality of evidence showed that only a few tools have high quality evidence for both sufficient validity and reliability: The Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest), the Mini-Balance Evaluation Systems Test (Mini-BESTest), the Berg Balance Scale (BBS) and the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test.

CONCLUSIONS

A few tools with high quality evidence for sufficient validity and reliability are currently available for balance assessment in older people that may be recommended for use in clinical and research settings. Further validation studies are required for muscle strength, muscle power and endurance assessment tools.

Group-Based and Individually Delivered LiFE: Content Evaluation and Predictors of Training Response – A Dose-Response Analysis

Introduction

Material and Methods

Results

Discussion and Conclusion

Trial Registration

“Aging Means to Me… That I Feel Lonely More Often”? An Experimental Study on the Effects of Age Simulation Regarding Views on Aging

Over the last decades, educational programs involving age simulation suits (ASS) emerged with the ambition to further the understanding of age-related loss experiences, enhance empathy and reduce negative attitudes toward older adults in healthcare settings and in younger age groups at large. However, the impact of such “instant aging” interventions on individuals’ personal views on aging have not been studied yet. The aim of the current study is to address possible effects of ASS interventions on multiple outcomes related to views on aging, i.e., aging-related cognitions (i.e., expectations regarding social losses), awareness of age-related change (AARC) and age stereotypes. Moreover, we explore effects on broader constructs with relevance to aging, i.e., perceived obsolescence, risk perceptions, as well as desired support through technology. In a within-subjects design, N = 40 participants (M = 61.4 years, SD = 6.16) went through a series of established geriatric assessments (i.e., Timed up and Go) with and without an ASS. Views on aging constructs were assessed in standardized questionnaires before and after the ASS intervention. Changes in aging-related cognitions were observed, with more negative expectations regarding social integration and continuous development after wearing the ASS. AARC and age stereotypes did not change from pre- to post-assessment, but participants reported an increased susceptibility to age-associated impairments and stronger feelings of obsolescence. Those participants who exhibited higher difficulties in geriatric assessments while wearing the suit reported higher openness to be supported by intelligent assistive devices or robots afterwards. We conclude that ASS interventions should only be combined with education on losses and gains during the aging process to prevent negative effects on individual views on aging. On the other hand, potentials regarding technology acceptance and formation of intentions to engage in prevention and health behaviors among middle-aged to young-old adults are discussed.

The Stepping Threshold Test for Reactive Balance: Validation of Two Observer-Based Evaluation Strategies to Assess Stepping Behavior in Fall-Prone Older Adults

Introduction: Measurement of reactive balance is critical for fall prevention but is severely underrepresented in the clinical setting due to the lack of valid assessments. The Stepping Threshold Test (STT) is a newly developed instrumented test for reactive balance on a movable platform, however, it has not yet been validated for fall-prone older adults. Furthermore, different schemes of observer-based evaluation seem possible. The aim of this study was to investigate validity with respect to fall risk, interpretability, and feasibility of the STT using two different evaluation strategies. Methods: This study involved 71 fall-prone older adults (aged ≥ 65) who underwent progressively increasing perturbations in four directions for the STT. Single and multiple-step thresholds for each perturbation direction were determined via two observer-based evaluation schemes, which are the 1) consideration of all steps (all-step-count evaluation, ACE) and 2) consideration of those steps that extend the base of support in the direction of perturbation (direction-sensitive evaluation, DSE). Established balance measures including global (Brief Balance Evaluations Systems Test, BriefBEST), proactive (Timed Up and Go, TUG), and static balance (8-level balance scale, 8LBS), as well as fear of falling (Short Falls Efficacy Scale-International, FES-I) and fall occurrence in the past year, served as reference measurements. Results: The sum scores of STT correlated moderately with the BriefBEST (ACE: r = 0.413; DSE: r = 0.388) and TUG (ACE: r = -0.379; DSE: r = -0.435) and low with the 8LBS (ACE: r = 0.173; DSE: r = 0.246) and Short FES-I (ACE: r = -0.108; DSE: r = -0.104). The sum scores did not distinguish between fallers and non-fallers. No floor/ceiling effects occurred for the STT sum score, but these effects occurred for specific STT thresholds for both ACE (mean floor effect = 13.04%, SD = 19.35%; mean ceiling effect = 4.29%, SD = 7.75%) and DSE (mean floor effect = 7.86%, SD = 15.23%; mean ceiling effect = 21.07%, SD = 26.08). No severe adverse events occurred. Discussion: Correlations between the STT and other balance tests were in the expected magnitude, indicating convergent validity. However, the STT could not distinguish between fallers and non-fallers, referring to a need for further studies and prospective surveys of falls to validate the STT. Current results did not allow a definitive judgment on the advantage of using ACE or DSE. Study results represented a step toward a reactive balance assessment application in a clinical setting.

Predicting Advanced Balance Ability and Mobility with an Instrumented Timed Up and Go Test

Extensive test batteries are often needed to obtain a comprehensive picture of a person’s functional status. Many test batteries are not suitable for active and healthy adults due to ceiling effects, or require a lot of space, time, and training. The Community Balance and Mobility Scale (CBMS) is considered a gold standard for this population, but the test is complex, as well as time- and resource intensive. There is a strong need for a faster, yet sensitive and robust test of physical function in seniors. We sought to investigate whether an instrumented Timed Up and Go (iTUG) could predict the CBMS score in 60 outpatients and healthy community-dwelling seniors, where features of the iTUG were predictive, and how the prediction of CBMS with the iTUG compared to standard clinical tests. A partial least squares regression analysis was used to identify latent components explaining variation in CBMS total score. The model with iTUG features was able to predict the CBMS total score with an accuracy of 85.2% (84.9–85.5%), while standard clinical tests predicted 82.5% (82.2–82.8%) of the score. These findings suggest that a fast and easily administered iTUG could be used to predict CBMS score, providing a valuable tool for research and clinical care.