Disability, physical activity, and health-related quality of life in Australian adults: An investigation using 19 waves of a longitudinal cohort

Abstract

Background Any form of long-term physical or mental impairment might negatively influence health-related quality of life (HRQoL). HRQoL, as an independent concept, covers a wide range of characteristics that includes physical, mental, social, and spiritual functions. People with disabilities are continuously exposed to multiple barriers that deteriorate their HRQoL. It also creates impairment in performing physical activities. However, experts opine regular physical exercise as an intervention to help disabled people. This research aims to investigate the association between disability and physical activity with HRQoL among the adult population in Australia. Design A retrospective cohort study. Methods This study utilized the most recent 19 waves of data (2002–2020) from the nationally representative Household, Income and Labour Dynamics in Australia (HILDA) survey. Component summary scores such as physical component summary (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS), and SF-6D utility scores were utilized to measure HRQoL. Random-effects GLS regression technique was fitted to estimate the association between disability and physical activity with HRQoL, after adjusting for a range of socio-demographic and health-related characteristics. Results Disability was negatively associated with the PCS (-5.95), MCS (-2.70) and SF-6D (-0.060) compared with non-disabled counterparts. However, respondents engaged in the recommended level of physical activity had substantial gain in PCS (b = 0.96), MCS (1.57), and SF-6D (0.021) scores. Besides, the results showed that performing the recommended level of physical activity in the presence of disability has lessen the negative effect of disability/ positive moderating effect of physical activity on PCS, MCS, and SF-6D scores by 1.84 points, 0.82 points, and 0.013 percentage points, respectively. Conclusion This study found an inverse association between disability and HRQoL among Australian adults. However, physical activity was associated with improved HRQoL. Therefore, public health interventions, such as the orientation of physical activities, have a higher potential to dwindle the burden regarding HRQoL.

Effects of physical activity participation on cognitive impairment in older adults population with disabilities

“…Research has shown that individuals with disabilities who do not meet recommended levels of physical activity report a significantly lower health-related quality of life than their non-disabled counterparts who are physically active. Importantly, these associations persist even after adjusting for potential confounders ( 18 ). Disabilities are often influenced by mental and neuromusculoskeletal dysfunction, factors that also contribute to lower energy expenditure during periods of physical activity.…”

Health utility assessments in individuals undergoing diagnostic and surveillance colonoscopy: improved discrimination with a cancer-specific scale

“…The discriminant abilities of both EQ-5D-5L and QLU-C10D were further explored using Tobit regression models, with adjustment for potential confounders of HRQoL to reduce bias [ 37 ]. Confounders considered included age, gender, marital status, having a disability and comorbidities which are known to affect health-related quality of life [ 38 – 40 ]. In addition, employment, having private health insurance and education level as proxies for socioeconomic status [ 41 ] and previous history of cancer, history of surgery as well the indication for colonoscopy were considered as proxies for baseline health status [ 40 ].…”

Effects of a 12-week, seated, virtual, home-based tele-exercise programme compared with a prerecorded video-based exercise programme in people with chronic neurological impairments: protocol for a randomised controlled trial

“…People with CNI often cannot access community exercise centres, as mobility can be more difficult, insurance payments sparse, centres not welcoming or accessible and assistive exercise equipment too costly for most facilities 22–35…”