Feasibility of population screening tests to establish a healthy ageing trajectory

Abstract

Objectives:There are no agreed comprehensive tests for age-related changes to physical, emotional, mental and social functioning. Research into declining function focuses on those 75 years and older and little is known about age-related changes in younger people. The aims of this project were (1) to ascertain a comprehensive test battery that could underpin community-based health screening programmes for people aged 40–75 years and pilot both (2) community-based recruitment and (3) the utility, acceptability, response burden and logistics.Methods:A total of 11 databases were searched using a broad range of relevant terms. An identified comprehensive, recent, high-quality systematic review of screening instruments for detection of early functional decline for community-dwelling older people identified many relevant tools; however, not all body systems were addressed. Therefore, lower hierarchy papers identified in the rapid review were included and expert panel consultation was conducted before the final test battery was agreed. Broad networks were developed in one Australian city to aid pilot recruitment of community-dwellers 40–75 years. Recruitment and testing processes were validated using feasibility testing with 12 volunteers.Results:The test battery captured (1) online self-reports of demographics, health status, sleep quality, distress, diet, physical activity, oral health, frailty and continence; and (2) objective tests of anthropometry; mobility; lung function; dexterity; flexibility, strength and stability; hearing; balance; cognition and memory; foot sensation; and reaction time. Recruitment and testing processes were found to be feasible.Conclusion:This screening approach may provide new knowledge on healthy ageing in younger people.

Pre-frailty factors in community-dwelling 40–75 year olds: opportunities for successful ageing

“…Data were collected at each site for 4-6 weeks between January 2017 and June 2018 using a similar approach to the biennial Tokyo Metropolitan Institute of Gerontology healthy aging survey [30]. The development of the assessment protocol [31] and the method of data collection [32] for this study have been reported elsewhere. A summary is provided here for the convenience of the reader.…”

“…Data was collected between January 2017 and July 2018 on an extensive range of evidence-based health and frailty measures. These measures were identified from an extensive review of measures related to functional decline [31]. Self-reported data was collected via online or hard copy survey prior to objective assessment and included: demographic data (age; gender; ethnicity; main language spoken at home; marital status; housing; employment; income; highest level of education; diagnosed health conditions; health concerns; alcohol and tobacco use; current medications; hospitalisations, emergency department presentations, falls and 'near-miss' falls in the past 6 months; unintended weight loss; appetite; participation in community activities); and continence [33], sleep quality [34], nutrition [35], hydration, usual activity patterns [36] and psychological distress using validated instruments [37] (see Table 1).…”

“…Participants with measures outside the expected values were excluded from further participation and referred to their doctor or the assessment was modified. Those without safety risks proceeded to measurement stations for anthropometry [43] (height and weight from which BMI and lean muscle mass [44] were calculated); audiometry [47]; balance [45]; cognition and memory [42]; upper limb dexterity standardised by gender and age [48]; 6 min walk test (standardised by Australian norms) [38]; exertion and dyspnoea [49]; foot sensation and skin health [50]; grip strength in sitting for dominant and non-dominant hands (standardised for age and gender) [39,40]; lung function and lung ratio compared with predicted lung ratio (standardised by age and gender) [51]; muscle strength, core trunk stability and flexibility [31,41]. Table 1 reports the health and frailty measures assessed with the expected normal values.…”

“…scored as 4, most of the time or 5, all of the time [37]; K10_tiredness score (Q. 1) [37] Single response item scored 1-5, with 1 = none; 5 = all of the time 4 or 5 [37] Modified Functional Movement Screen (FMS) elements (0-3, with 0 being pain precluding activity, 1 being unable to attempt test, 2 being partial attempt; 3 successfullycompleted test) [31,41] Sum of scores for deep squat, hurdle step, in line floor lunge, opposite side arm / leg extension in four-point kneeling…”

Training with elastic and conventional devices on body composition: systematic review and meta-analysis

“…Other studies have also found positive results regarding the use of elastic devices in resistance training protocols in different scenarios [18,[30][31][32]. This fact enhances the possibilities of its use in clinical and scientific contexts, in healthy and sick populations [33][34][35].…”