BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The objectives of this study were to determine if Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) information could be collected in a hospitalized older patient population, and to assess associations between SPPB scores and sociodemographic characteristics and clinical measures. METHODS: A cross sectional design was used that included 90 adults aged 65 years or older admitted to an Acute Care for Elders unit. Patient information was collected within 24 hours of hospitalization. SPPB was scored using established criteria in older persons living in the community and revised criteria based on older persons hospitalized with acute illness. RESULTS: The mean age was 75.3 (SD 7.1) years; 61% were women. The SPPB can be safely and reliably administered to hospitalized elderly patients. No injuries or adverse events occurred. Hospital SPPB scoring criteria better distributed the overall range of performance for older patients than community SPPB scoring criteria. In multivariate regression analyses, increasing age (p=0.007), length of stay (p=0.02), comorbidities (p=0.04), and cognition (p=0.02) were significantly and inversely associated with SPPB when scored using hospital based scoring criteria. Only age (p=0.02) was significantly associated with SPPB when using community based scoring criteria. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that a SPPB can be reliably collected in hospitalized older patients. The study further suggests that hospital based SPPB scoring criteria may be more appropriate for an older patient population.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The objectives of this study were to determine if Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) information could be collected in a hospitalized older patient population, and to assess associations between SPPB scores and sociodemographic characteristics and clinical measures. METHODS: A cross sectional design was used that included 90 adults aged 65 years or older admitted to an Acute Care for Elders unit. Patient information was collected within 24 hours of hospitalization. SPPB was scored using established criteria in older persons living in the community and revised criteria based on older persons hospitalized with acute illness. RESULTS: The mean age was 75.3 (SD 7.1) years; 61% were women. The SPPB can be safely and reliably administered to hospitalized elderly patients. No injuries or adverse events occurred. Hospital SPPB scoring criteria better distributed the overall range of performance for older patients than community SPPB scoring criteria. In multivariate regression analyses, increasing age (p=0.007), length of stay (p=0.02), comorbidities (p=0.04), and cognition (p=0.02) were significantly and inversely associated with SPPB when scored using hospital based scoring criteria. Only age (p=0.02) was significantly associated with SPPB when using community based scoring criteria. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that a SPPB can be reliably collected in hospitalized older patients. The study further suggests that hospital based SPPB scoring criteria may be more appropriate for an older patient population.
Authors: J M Guralnik; L Ferrucci; C F Pieper; S G Leveille; K S Markides; G V Ostir; S Studenski; L F Berkman; R B Wallace Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2000-04 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: B W Penninx; L Ferrucci; S G Leveille; T Rantanen; M Pahor; J M Guralnik Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2000-11 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: L Ferrucci; B W Penninx; S G Leveille; M C Corti; M Pahor; R Wallace; T B Harris; R J Havlik; J M Guralnik Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2000-09 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Stephanie Studenski; Subashan Perera; Dennis Wallace; Julie M Chandler; Pamela W Duncan; Earl Rooney; Michael Fox; Jack M Guralnik Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2003-03 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: K S Markides; S A Black; G V Ostir; R J Angel; J M Guralnik; M Lichtenstein Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2001-04 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: M Montero-Odasso; M Schapira; C Varela; C Pitteri; E R Soriano; R Kaplan; L A Camera; L M Mayorga Journal: J Nutr Health Aging Date: 2004 Impact factor: 4.075
Authors: Kenneth E Covinsky; Robert M Palmer; Richard H Fortinsky; Steven R Counsell; Anita L Stewart; Denise Kresevic; Christopher J Burant; C Seth Landefeld Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2003-04 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Gordon R Reeves; David J Whellan; Pamela Duncan; Christopher M O'Connor; Amy M Pastva; Joel D Eggebeen; Leigh Ann Hewston; Timothy M Morgan; Shelby D Reed; W Jack Rejeski; Robert J Mentz; Paul B Rosenberg; Dalane W Kitzman Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2016-12-28 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: T Braun; R-J Schulz; M Hoffmann; J Reinke; L Tofaute; C Urner; H Krämer; T Bock; N de Morton; C Grüneberg Journal: Z Gerontol Geriatr Date: 2015-02 Impact factor: 1.281
Authors: Julio Cabrero-García; Carmen Luz Muñoz-Mendoza; María José Cabañero-Martínez; Lorena González-Llopís; Juan Diego Ramos-Pichardo; Abilio Reig-Ferrer Journal: Aten Primaria Date: 2012-05-16 Impact factor: 1.137
Authors: Rita N Bakhru; James F Davidson; Rebecca E Bookstaver; Michael T Kenes; Kristin G Welborn; Peter E Morris; D Clark Files Journal: J Crit Care Date: 2018-02-03 Impact factor: 3.425
Authors: Rachel R Deer; Jared M Dickinson; Jacques Baillargeon; Steven R Fisher; Mukaila Raji; Elena Volpi Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2019-09-15 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Marian L Neuhouser; Rebecca P Hunt; Linda Van Horn; James M Shikany; Marcia L Stefanick; Karen C Johnson; Robert Brunner; Brad Cannell; Irene E Hatsu; Lesley F Tinker Journal: Prev Med Date: 2020-08-12 Impact factor: 4.018
Authors: Julia E Inglis; Isabel D Fernandez; Edwin van Wijngaarden; Eva Culakova; Jennifer E Reschke; Amber S Kleckner; Po-Ju Lin; Karen M Mustian; Luke J Peppone Journal: Nutr Cancer Date: 2020-09-11 Impact factor: 2.900