Heather E Whitson1, Wei Duan-Porter2, Kenneth E Schmader3, Miriam C Morey3, Harvey J Cohen3, Cathleen S Colón-Emeric3. 1. Duke University Center for the Study of Aging, Durham, North Carolina. Department of Medicine, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina. Durham VA Geriatrics Research, Education, and Clinical Center (GRECC), North Carolina. Department of Ophthalmology, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina. heather.whitson@duke.edu. 2. Duke University Center for the Study of Aging, Durham, North Carolina. Durham VA Health Services Research and Development, North Carolina. 3. Duke University Center for the Study of Aging, Durham, North Carolina. Department of Medicine, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina. Durham VA Geriatrics Research, Education, and Clinical Center (GRECC), North Carolina.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Resilience has been described in the psychosocial literature as the capacity to maintain or regain well-being during or after adversity. Physical resilience is a newer concept that is highly relevant to successful aging. Our objective was to characterize the emerging construct of resilience as it pertains to physical health in older adults, and to identify gaps and opportunities to advance research in this area. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review to identify English language papers published through January 2015 that apply the term "resilience" in relation to physical health in older adults. We applied a modified framework analysis to characterize themes in implicit or explicit definitions of physical resilience. RESULTS: Of 1,078 abstracts identified, 49 articles met criteria for inclusion. Sixteen were letters or concept papers, and only one was an intervention study. Definitions of physical resilience spanned cellular to whole-person levels, incorporated many outcome measures, and represented three conceptual themes: resilience as a trait, trajectory, or characteristic/capacity. CONCLUSIONS: Current biomedical literature lacks consensus on how to define and measure physical resilience. We propose a working definition of physical resilience at the whole person level: a characteristic which determines one's ability to resist or recover from functional decline following health stressor(s). We present a conceptual framework that encompasses the related construct of physiologic reserve. We discuss gaps and opportunities in measurement, interactions across contributors to physical resilience, and points of intervention. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Gerontological Society of America 2015.
BACKGROUND: Resilience has been described in the psychosocial literature as the capacity to maintain or regain well-being during or after adversity. Physical resilience is a newer concept that is highly relevant to successful aging. Our objective was to characterize the emerging construct of resilience as it pertains to physical health in older adults, and to identify gaps and opportunities to advance research in this area. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review to identify English language papers published through January 2015 that apply the term "resilience" in relation to physical health in older adults. We applied a modified framework analysis to characterize themes in implicit or explicit definitions of physical resilience. RESULTS: Of 1,078 abstracts identified, 49 articles met criteria for inclusion. Sixteen were letters or concept papers, and only one was an intervention study. Definitions of physical resilience spanned cellular to whole-person levels, incorporated many outcome measures, and represented three conceptual themes: resilience as a trait, trajectory, or characteristic/capacity. CONCLUSIONS: Current biomedical literature lacks consensus on how to define and measure physical resilience. We propose a working definition of physical resilience at the whole person level: a characteristic which determines one's ability to resist or recover from functional decline following health stressor(s). We present a conceptual framework that encompasses the related construct of physiologic reserve. We discuss gaps and opportunities in measurement, interactions across contributors to physical resilience, and points of intervention. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Gerontological Society of America 2015.
Authors: Magdalena I Tolea; Luigi Ferrucci; Paul T Costa; Kimberly Faulkner; Caterina Rosano; Suzanne Satterfield; Hilsa N Ayonayon; Eleanor M Simonsick Journal: J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci Date: 2012-03-20 Impact factor: 4.077
Authors: Daniel W Belsky; Avshalom Caspi; Renate Houts; Harvey J Cohen; David L Corcoran; Andrea Danese; HonaLee Harrington; Salomon Israel; Morgan E Levine; Jonathan D Schaefer; Karen Sugden; Ben Williams; Anatoli I Yashin; Richie Poulton; Terrie E Moffitt Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2015-07-06 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Cathleen Colón-Emeric; Heather E Whitson; Carl F Pieper; Richard Sloane; Denise Orwig; Kim M Huffman; Janet Prvu Bettger; Daniel Parker; Donna M Crabtree; Ann Gruber-Baldini; Jay Magaziner Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2019-08-30 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Heather E Whitson; Harvey J Cohen; Kenneth E Schmader; Miriam C Morey; George Kuchel; Cathleen S Colon-Emeric Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2018-03-25 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Daniel C Parker; Cathleen Colόn-Emeric; Janet L Huebner; Ching-Heng Chou; Virginia Byers Kraus; Carl F Pieper; Richard Sloane; Heather E Whitson; Denise Orwig; Donna M Crabtree; Jay Magaziner; James R Bain; Michael Muehlbauer; Olga R Ilkayeva; Kim M Huffman Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2020-09-25 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Arti Hurria; Enrique Soto-Perez-de-Celis; Jacob B Allred; Harvey Jay Cohen; Anait Arsenyan; Karla Ballman; Jennifer Le-Rademacher; Aminah Jatoi; Julie Filo; Jeanne Mandelblatt; Jacqueline M Lafky; Gretchen Kimmick; Heidi D Klepin; Rachel A Freedman; Harold Burstein; Julie Gralow; Antonio C Wolff; Gustav Magrinat; Myra Barginear; Hyman Muss Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2018-08-26 Impact factor: 5.562