BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Physical function and quality of life represent two major components of multidimensional evaluation in older people. The aim of the study was to verify which specific physical function measure is a more important predictor of quality of life in these individuals. METHODS: Data are from 73 community-dwelling older persons attending a geriatric cardiovascular clinic. Linear regressions and analyses of covariance were performed to explore the relationships between physical function measures (4-meter walking test [4mWS], Short Physical Performance Battery [SPPB], Activities of Daily Living [ADL], and Instrumental ADL [IADL]) and quality of life (assessed using the European Quality of Life [EuroQoL] instrument). To provide fair comparisons across all the physical function measures, results were provided according to their increase in standard deviation (SD). RESULTS: The mean age of the sample population (women 52%) was 77.6 (SD=8.3) years old. Given significant gender interactions between physical function and quality of life, separate analyses were conducted for men and women. In women, all physical function measures were significantly associated with quality of life measures in unadjusted models (p-values<0.05). The EuroQoL visual analogic scale maintained its significant associations with SPPB, ADL and IADL, even after adjustment for potential confounders. In men, no physical function measure was consistently associated with quality of life in the fully-adjusted models. Gender-specific differences in the perception of quality of life were reported for disabilities in specific IADL tasks. CONCLUSIONS: Physical function is associated with quality of life in older persons. In particular, disabilities in some specific IADL tasks seem to be especially perceived by women as undermining their quality of life. The use of the IADL scale in men may not be as reliable as in women.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Physical function and quality of life represent two major components of multidimensional evaluation in older people. The aim of the study was to verify which specific physical function measure is a more important predictor of quality of life in these individuals. METHODS: Data are from 73 community-dwelling older persons attending a geriatric cardiovascular clinic. Linear regressions and analyses of covariance were performed to explore the relationships between physical function measures (4-meter walking test [4mWS], Short Physical Performance Battery [SPPB], Activities of Daily Living [ADL], and Instrumental ADL [IADL]) and quality of life (assessed using the European Quality of Life [EuroQoL] instrument). To provide fair comparisons across all the physical function measures, results were provided according to their increase in standard deviation (SD). RESULTS: The mean age of the sample population (women 52%) was 77.6 (SD=8.3) years old. Given significant gender interactions between physical function and quality of life, separate analyses were conducted for men and women. In women, all physical function measures were significantly associated with quality of life measures in unadjusted models (p-values<0.05). The EuroQoL visual analogic scale maintained its significant associations with SPPB, ADL and IADL, even after adjustment for potential confounders. In men, no physical function measure was consistently associated with quality of life in the fully-adjusted models. Gender-specific differences in the perception of quality of life were reported for disabilities in specific IADL tasks. CONCLUSIONS: Physical function is associated with quality of life in older persons. In particular, disabilities in some specific IADL tasks seem to be especially perceived by women as undermining their quality of life. The use of the IADL scale in men may not be as reliable as in women.
Authors: Jamie N Justice; Marnie G Silverstein-Metzler; Beth Uberseder; Susan E Appt; Thomas B Clarkson; Thomas C Register; Stephen B Kritchevsky; Carol A Shively Journal: Geroscience Date: 2017-10-28 Impact factor: 7.713
Authors: Marla K Beauchamp; Suzanne G Leveille; Kushang V Patel; Dan K Kiely; Caroline L Phillips; Stefania Bandinelli; Luigi Ferrucci; Jack Guralnik; Jonathan F Bean Journal: Am J Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2014-05 Impact factor: 2.159
Authors: Justin P Turner; Sepehr Shakib; Nimit Singhal; Jonathon Hogan-Doran; Robert Prowse; Sally Johns; J Simon Bell Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2014-03-02 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Jamie N Justice; Matteo Cesari; Douglas R Seals; Carol A Shively; Christy S Carter Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2015-04-23 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Emilie Rune Hegelund; Cathrine Lawaetz Wimmelmann; Jenna Marie Strizzi; Anna Paldam Folker; Erik Lykke Mortensen; Trine Flensborg-Madsen Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2019-11-02 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Mark H Edwards; Suzan van der Pas; Michael Dieter Denkinger; Camille Parsons; Karen A Jameson; Laura Schaap; Sabina Zambon; Maria-Victoria Castell; Florian Herbolsheimer; Hans Nasell; Mercedes Sanchez-Martinez; Angel Otero; Thorsten Nikolaus; Natasja M van Schoor; Nancy L Pedersen; Stefania Maggi; Dorly J H Deeg; Cyrus Cooper; Elaine Dennison Journal: Age Ageing Date: 2014-06-10 Impact factor: 10.668