| Literature DB >> 32028945 |
Johanna Geritz1, Sara Maetzold2, Maren Steffen2, Andrea Pilotto3, Marta F Corrà4, Mariana Moscovich5, Maria C Rizzetti3, Barbara Borroni3, Alessandro Padovani3, Annekathrin Alpes2, Corinna Bang6, Igor Barcellos5, Ralf Baron2, Thorsten Bartsch2, Jos S Becktepe2, Daniela Berg2, Lu M Bergeest2, Philipp Bergmann7, Raquel Bouça-Machado8, Michael Drey9, Morad Elshehabi2, Susan Farahmandi2, Joaquim J Ferreira8, Andre Franke6, Anja Friederich2, Corinna Geisler10, Philipp Hüllemann2, Janne Gierthmühlen2, Oliver Granert2, Sebastian Heinzel2, Maren K Heller2, Markus A Hobert2, Marc Hofmann11, Björn Jemlich12, Laura Kerkmann2, Stephanie Knüpfer13, Katharina Krause7, Maximilian Kress2, Sonja Krupp14, Jennifer Kudelka2, Gregor Kuhlenbäumer2, Roland Kurth15, Frank Leypoldt2, Corina Maetzler2, Luis F Maia4, Andreas Moewius16, Patricia Neumann17, Katharina Niemann2, Christian T Ortlieb2, Steffen Paschen2, Minh H Pham2,18, Thomas Puehler19, Franziska Radloff2, Christian Riedel20, Marten Rogalski2, Simone Sablowsky2, Elena M Schanz2, Linda Schebesta2,19, Andreas Schicketmüller11, Simone Studt15, Martina Thieves21, Lars Tönges16, Sebastian Ullrich12, Peter P Urban17, Nuno Vila-Chã4, Anna Wiegard2, Elke Warmerdam2,18, Tobias Warnecke22, Michael Weiss2, Julius Welzel2, Clint Hansen2, Walter Maetzler2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Motor and cognitive deficits and consequently mobility problems are common in geriatric patients. The currently available methods for diagnosis and for the evaluation of treatment in this vulnerable cohort are limited. The aims of the ComOn (COgnitive and Motor interactions in the Older populatioN) study are (i) to define quantitative markers with clinical relevance for motor and cognitive deficits, (ii) to investigate the interaction between both motor and cognitive deficits and (iii) to assess health status as well as treatment outcome of 1000 geriatric inpatients in hospitals of Kiel (Germany), Brescia (Italy), Porto (Portugal), Curitiba (Brazil) and Bochum (Germany).Entities:
Keywords: Balance; Body-worn sensors; Comprehensive geriatric assessment; Executive function; Gait; Older adults; Quantitative assessment; Wearables
Year: 2020 PMID: 32028945 PMCID: PMC7006407 DOI: 10.1186/s12877-020-1445-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Geriatr ISSN: 1471-2318 Impact factor: 3.921
Fig. 1Study flowchart. Overview of the study including visits and relevant assessments. CS: Cross-sectional, MCRC: Minimal clinically relevant change, RTT: Response to treatment, T1: Baseline assessment (before / at admission), T2: Follow-up assessment (at / after discharge), T0: Time of assessment 0, for reliability / MCIC evaluation (24 h before or after T1)
Fig. 2Assessment of axial motor function. Simplified illustration of the standardized motor tasks. SPPB: Short Physical Performance Battery, TUG: Timed-up-and-Go Test
Tests of axial motor functions
| Test | Task |
|---|---|
| Short Physical Performance Battery | Tandem, semi-tandem, side-by-side stand Two 4-m-walks with comfortable speed 5-Chair rise test, as fast as possible |
Timed-up-and-Go test Straight walk Circular walk | Rise from a chair, 3-m-walk, turning, walk back Standing position, 3-m-walk, no turning Standing position, 20-m-walk under single and dual task conditions Walk around a 1.20 m circle under single and dual task conditions |