Richard E Kennedy1,2, Marzouq Almutairi3, Courtney P Williams1, Patricia Sawyer1,2, Richard M Allman4, Cynthia J Brown1,2,5. 1. Department of Medicine, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama. 2. Comprehensive Center for Healthy Aging, Birmingham, Alabama. 3. Department of Physical Therapy, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama. 4. Geriatrics and Extended Care, Veterans Health Administration, Washington, District of Columbia. 5. Birmingham/Atlanta Veterans Administration Geriatric Research, Education, and Clinical Center, Birmingham, Alabama.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/ OBJECTIVES: The University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB) Life-Space Assessment (LSA) is a widely used measure of community mobility. To assist clinicians and researchers with assessing the significance of changes in scores, we determined the minimal important change associated with a change in health status. SETTING: Homes of community-dwelling older adults. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 419 African American and non-Hispanic white adults 75 years and older participating in the UAB Study of Aging II, a longitudinal epidemiological study across the state of Alabama. INTERVENTION: None. MEASUREMENTS: Linear mixed models were used to compare change in LSA scores over 1-month intervals (N = 9712) between participants reporting improvement, no change, or decline in activities of daily living walking scores, accounting for the correlation among scores for the same participant over time. RESULTS: A decline in walking status was associated with a mean decrease in LSA scores of 2.93 points (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.69-4.17 points), indicating lower mobility. An improvement in walking status was associated with a mean increase in LSA scores of 2.51 points (95% CI = 1.26-3.77 points), indicating higher mobility. CONCLUSION: A change in LSA scores of five or more is clinically important, exceeding the 95% CI for the change in LSA associated with change in walking status. Changes exceeding this threshold should prompt further investigation by providers with a goal of preserving mobility. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:565-569, 2019.
BACKGROUND/ OBJECTIVES: The University of Alabama at Birmingham (UAB) Life-Space Assessment (LSA) is a widely used measure of community mobility. To assist clinicians and researchers with assessing the significance of changes in scores, we determined the minimal important change associated with a change in health status. SETTING: Homes of community-dwelling older adults. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 419 African American and non-Hispanic white adults 75 years and older participating in the UAB Study of Aging II, a longitudinal epidemiological study across the state of Alabama. INTERVENTION: None. MEASUREMENTS: Linear mixed models were used to compare change in LSA scores over 1-month intervals (N = 9712) between participants reporting improvement, no change, or decline in activities of daily living walking scores, accounting for the correlation among scores for the same participant over time. RESULTS: A decline in walking status was associated with a mean decrease in LSA scores of 2.93 points (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.69-4.17 points), indicating lower mobility. An improvement in walking status was associated with a mean increase in LSA scores of 2.51 points (95% CI = 1.26-3.77 points), indicating higher mobility. CONCLUSION: A change in LSA scores of five or more is clinically important, exceeding the 95% CI for the change in LSA associated with change in walking status. Changes exceeding this threshold should prompt further investigation by providers with a goal of preserving mobility. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:565-569, 2019.
Authors: Melisa L Wong; Ying Shi; Alexander K Smith; Christine Miaskowski; W John Boscardin; Harvey Jay Cohen; Vivian Lam; Melissa Mazor; Lia Metzger; Carolyn J Presley; Grant R Williams; Kah Poh Loh; Carling J Ursem; Terence W Friedlander; Collin M Blakely; Matthew A Gubens; Gregory Allen; Dianne Shumay; Louise C Walter Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2021-10-05 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Emily J Smail; Christopher N Kaufmann; Kira E Riehm; Mamoun T Mardini; Erta Cenko; Chen Bai; Todd M Manini Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2022-05-26 Impact factor: 7.538
Authors: Anisha Suri; Andrea L Rosso; Jessie VanSwearingen; Leslie M Coffman; Mark S Redfern; Jennifer S Brach; Ervin Sejdić Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2021-09-13 Impact factor: 6.591
Authors: A Kuspinar; C P Verschoor; M K Beauchamp; J Dushoff; J Ma; E Amster; C Bassim; V Dal Bello-Haas; M A Gregory; J E Harris; L Letts; S E Neil-Sztramko; J Richardson; R Valaitis; B Vrkljan Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2020-01-31 Impact factor: 3.921
Authors: M D Saraiva; D Apolinario; T J Avelino-Silva; C de Assis Moura Tavares; I F Gattás-Vernaglia; C Marques Fernandes; L M Rabelo; S Tavares Fernandes Yamaguti; T Karnakis; R Kalil-Filho; W Jacob-Filho; M J Romero Aliberti Journal: J Nutr Health Aging Date: 2021 Impact factor: 4.075