SummaryThis observational study assessed vertical impacts experienced in older adults as part of their day-to-day physical activity using accelerometry and questionnaire data. Population-based older adults experienced very limited high-impact activity. The accelerometry method utilised appeared to be valid based on comparisons between different cohorts and with self-reported activity.IntroductionWe aimed to validate a novel method for evaluating day-to-day higher impact weight-bearing physical activity (PA) in older adults, thought to be important in protecting against osteoporosis, by comparing results between four cohorts varying in age and activity levels, and with self-reported PA levels.MethodsParticipants were from three population-based cohorts, MRC National Survey of Health and Development (NSHD), Hertfordshire Cohort Study (HCS) and Cohort for Skeletal Health in Bristol and Avon (COSHIBA), and the Master Athlete Cohort (MAC). Y-axis peaks (reflecting the vertical when an individual is upright) from a triaxial accelerometer (sampling frequency 50 Hz, range 0–16 g) worn at the waist for 7 days were classified as low (0.5–1.0 g), medium (1.0–1.5 g) or higher (≥1.5 g) impacts.ResultsThere were a median of 90, 41 and 39 higher impacts/week in NSHD (age 69.5), COSHIBA (age 76.8) and HCS (age 78.5) participants, respectively (total n = 1512). In contrast, MAC participants (age 68.5) had a median of 14,322 higher impacts/week. In the three population cohorts combined, based on comparison of beta coefficients, moderate-high-impact activities as assessed by PA questionnaire were suggestive of stronger association with higher impacts from accelerometers (0.25 [0.17, 0.34]), compared with medium (0.18 [0.09, 0.27]) and low impacts (0.13 [0.07,0.19]) (beta coefficient, with 95 % CI). Likewise in MAC, reported moderate-high-impact activities showed a stronger association with higher impacts (0.26 [0.14, 0.37]), compared with medium (0.14 [0.05, 0.22]) and low impacts (0.03 [−0.02, 0.08]).ConclusionsOur new accelerometer method appears to provide valid measures of higher vertical impacts in older adults. Results obtained from the three population-based cohorts indicate that older adults generally experience very limited higher impact weight-bearing PA.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00198-016-3810-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
SummaryWe examined bone density in older athletes and controls. Sprinters had greater hip and spine bone density than endurance athletes and controls, whereas values were similar in the latter two groups. These results could not be explained by differences in impact, muscle size or power between sprint and endurance athletes.PurposeWe examined the relationship between prolonged participation in regular sprint or endurance running and skeletal health at key clinical sites in older age, and the factors responsible for any associations which we observed.MethodsWe recruited 38 master sprint runners (28 males, 10 females, mean age 71 ± 7 years), 149 master endurance runners (111 males, 38 females, mean age 70 ± 6 years) and 59 non-athletic controls (29 males, 30 females, mean age 74 ± 5 years). Dual X-ray absorptiometry was used to assess hip and spine bone mineral density (BMD), body composition (lean and fat mass), whilst jump power was assessed with jumping mechanography. In athletes, vertical impacts were recorded over 7 days from a waist-worn accelerometer, and details of starting age, age-graded performance and training hours were recorded.ResultsIn ANOVA models adjusted for sex, age, height, body composition, and jump power, sprinter hip BMD was 10 and 14% greater than that of endurance runners and controls respectively. Sprinter spine BMD was also greater than that of both endurance runners and controls. There were no differences in hip or spine BMD between endurance runners and controls. Stepwise regression showed only discipline (sprint/endurance), sex, and age as predictors of athlete spine BMD, whilst these variables and starting age were predictive of hip BMD.ConclusionsRegular running is associated with greater BMD at the fracture-prone hip and spine sites in master sprinters but not endurance runners. These benefits cannot be explained by indicators of mechanical loading measured in this study including vertical impacts, body composition or muscular output.
Background The aim of this study was to compare the relative performance of total knee replacement constructs and discern if there is variability in performance in currently commonly used prostheses in the New Zealand Joint Registry (NZJR) using a noninferiority analysis. Methods All patients who underwent a primary total knee replacement (TKR) registered in the NZJR between 1st January 1999 to June 2020 were identified. Using a noninferiority analysis, the performance of total knee replacement prostheses were compared with the best performing contemporary construct. Construct all-cause revision rate was estimated using the 1-Kaplan Meier survival function method to estimate net failure. The difference in all-cause revision rates between the contemporary benchmark and all other constructs was tested. Results In total 110 183 TKR were recorded and 25 constructs (102 717 procedures) had > 500 procedures at risk at 3 years post-primary of which 5 were inferior by at least 20 % relative risk of which, one was inferior by at least 100 % relative risk. 14 constructs were identified with > 500 procedures at risk at 10 years with 5 inferior by at least 20 %, of which 2 were inferior by > 100 % relative risk. Conclusions We discerned that there is great variability in construct performance and at all time points, greater than 25 % of constructs are inferior to the best performing construct by at least 20 %. These results can help inform patients, clinicians and health care funders when considering TKR surgery.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.