Journal of Geriatric Physical Therapy最新文献

Background and purpose: The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality highlights the need for sustainable linkages between clinical and community settings to enhance prevention and improve care of people with chronic conditions. The first step in promoting linkages is understanding the knowledge and use of evidence-based programs by physical therapy (PT) professionals. Therefore, the objective of this study was to describe the knowledge of and referral to evidence-based programs in the community by a convenience sample of PT professionals and to examine the characteristics of those who refer to evidence-based programs.

Methods: A cross-sectional web-based survey containing 36 questions regarding respondents' demographics and evidence-based program knowledge and referral practices was disseminated to a convenience sample of PT professionals via email, news-blasts, social media, and word of mouth.

Results and discussion: A total of 459 PT professionals completed the survey. Approximately half reported practicing for more than 20 years and 75% are members of the American Physical Therapy Association (APTA). The majority (74%) are aware of evidence-based programs; however, fewer (56%) refer to these programs. Compared with individuals who do not refer to evidence-based programs, individuals who refer are more likely to be involved in PT organizations and be an APTA Geriatrics member. Of the individuals who do not refer to evidence-based programs, 21.5% reported not knowing they existed and 33% reported not knowing where the programs are located.

Conclusions: Most survey respondents reported knowing about evidence-based programs and more than half reported being aware of the evidence-based programs available in their communities. These results indicate many PT professionals already have a knowledge of evidence-based programs to support clinic-community linkages. As survey respondents were a sample of convenience and likely do not represent all PT professionals in the United States, the results should be interpreted with caution. Additional research on a more representative sample is needed to fully understand the current utilization of evidence-based programs, which will enable us to design efforts to improve the clinic to community transition. Improving linkages between PT professionals and community resources has the potential to benefit both patients and clinicians and lessen the burden on the health care system.

Background and purpose: To determine the effects of resistance training (RT) on symptoms, function, and lower limb muscle strength in patients with knee osteoarthritis (KOA), and to determine the optimal dose-response relationships.

Data sources: We searched the PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases from inception to January 23, 2022.

Eligibility criteria: Randomized controlled trials that examined the effects of RT in KOA patients (mean age ≥50 years) were included.

Data synthesis: We applied Hedges' g of the random-effects model to calculate the between-subject standardized mean difference (SMDbs). A random-effects metaregression was calculated to explain the influence of key training variables on the effectiveness of RT. We used the Grading of Recommendations Assessments, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) method to appraise the certainty of evidence.

Results: A total of 46 studies with 4289 participants were included. The analysis revealed moderate effects of RT on symptoms and function (SMDbs =-0.52; 95% CI: -0.64 to -0.40), and lower limb muscle strength (SMDbs = 0.53; 95% CI: 0.42 to 0.64) in the intervention group compared with the control group. The results of the metaregression revealed that only the variable "training period" (P< .001) had significant effects on symptoms, function, and lower limb muscle strength, and the 4 to 8 weeks of training subgroup showed greater effects than other subgroups (SMDbs =-0.70, -0.91 to -0.48; SMDbs = 0.76, 0.56 to 0.96).

Conclusions: Compared with inactive treatments, RT is strongly recommended to improve symptoms, function, and muscle strength in individuals with KOA. Dose-response relationship analysis showed that 4 to 8 weeks of RT had more benefits.

Background: The purpose of this study is to stratify the age at which older adults are most likely to sustain injuries and major complications resulting from low-energy falls so that fall prevention strategies may be targeted to more susceptible age groups.

Methods: A consecutive series of 12 709 patients older than 55 years enrolled in an orthopedic trauma registry from October 2014 to April 2021 were reviewed for demographic factors, hospital quality measures, and outcomes. Patients were grouped by age brackets in 5-year intervals. Comparative analyses were conducted across age groups with an additional post hoc analysis comparing the 75- to 79-year-old cohort with others. All statistical analyses were conducted utilizing a Bonferroni-adjusted alpha.

Results: Of the 12 709 patients, 9924 patients (78%) sustained a low-energy fall. The mean age of the cohort was 75.3 (range: 55-106) years and the median number of complications per person was 1.0 (range: 0-7). The proportion of females increased across each age group. The mean Charlson Comorbidity Index increased across each age group, except in the cohort of 90+ years of age. There was a varied distribution of fractures among age groups with the incidence of hip fractures most prominently increasing with age. Complication rates varied significantly between all age groups. Between the ages of 70 to 74 years and 80 to 84 years, there was a 2-fold increase in complication rate, and between the ages of 70 to 74 years and 75 to 79 years, there was a near 2×/1.5×/1.4× increase in inpatient, 30-day, and 1-year mortality rate, respectively. When controlling for confounding demographic variables between age groups, the rates of complications and mortality still differed.

Conclusions: Fall prevention interventions, while applicable to all older adult patients, could improve outcomes by offering additional resources particularly for individuals between 70 and 80 years of age. These additional resources can help minimize excessive hospitalizations, prolonged lengths of stay, and the detrimental complications that frequently coincide with falls. Although hip fractures are the most common fracture as patients get older, other fractures still occur with frequency, and fall prevention strategies should account for prevention of these injuries as well.

Background: An analysis of practice is conducted by the American Board of Physical Therapy Specialties (ABPTS) every 10 years to revalidate, update, and revise the description of specialty practice (DSP) for each specialty. The Geriatric Specialty Council recently conducted an analysis of practice and revised its content consistent with established procedures by the ABPTS.

Purpose: The purpose of this article is threefold: first, to describe the process of the most recent practice analysis; second, to report revisions to the description of specialty practice based on the analysis of practice; and third, to identify elements of practice that define current specialist practice in geriatric physical therapy.

Methods: A 10-member committee of subject matter experts (SMEs) and a psychometric consultant developed a survey instrument addressing geriatric physical therapy specialty practice areas. The survey was initially pilot-tested and subsequently administered online to a sample of 801 board-certified geriatric clinical specialists. The consultant facilitated the consensus process to determine decision rules in selecting the final competencies describing current geriatric physical therapy specialty practice.

Results: A total of 372 respondents fully or partially completed the survey, resulting in a response rate of 46.4%. Based on a priori decision rules regarding survey data, consensus of the group of SMEs, and input from the ABPTS, the DSP for geriatric physical therapy specialty practice was revised. Revisions (elimination [-] of prior items and addition [+] of new items) were made in Section 1: Knowledge Areas (-8 and +6), in Section 2: Professional Roles, Responsibilities, and Values (-14 and +4), and Section 3: Practice Expectations (-53 and +28).

Conclusion: The revised DSP will be used as the basis for the development of the examination blueprint for the specialist examination in geriatric physical therapy and the curricula for residency programs in geriatric physical therapy.

Background and purpose: Sarcopenia is a common muscle disease among the older population, posing an increased risk for functional decline and intervention for loss of independence in daily living. Early detection of sarcopenia among older people before functional decline would be beneficial in enhancing their quality of life. The Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia (AWGS) 2019 recommends the use of 3 screening methods for community-based sarcopenia detection: calf circumference (CC), or the Strength, Assistance in walking, Rise from a chair, Climb stairs, and Falls (SARC-F) questionnaire, or the SARC-F in combination with CC (SARC-CalF) questionnaire. This study aims to compare the relative performance of these 3 methods as screening tools for sarcopenia within a community-dwelling older population.

Methods: A total number of 700 community-dwelling older adults participated in the current study. Muscle mass, muscle strength, and physical performance were measured with bioelectrical impedance analysis, handgrip strength, and gait speed, respectively. The AWGS 2019 criteria were considered the criterion standard The sensitivity/specificity, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) analyses were determined for CC, SARC-F, and SARC-CalF to determine their relative diagnostic performance.

Results: Sarcopenia was identified in 21.4% of participants according to the AWGS2019 criteria. The overall prevalence of sarcopenia was 56.6%, 14.7%, and 22.9% according to CC, SARC-F, and SARC-CalF, respectively. Calf circumference showed the highest sensitivity but lowest specificity based on AWGS 2019 as the criterion standard regardless of age, gender, and body mass index. The SARC-CalF showed better sensitivity but similar specificity than the SARC-F. The AUROC of CC was significantly better than that of SARC-F and SARC-CalF. The AUROCs of CC, SARC-F, and SARC-CalF were statistically significant in all populations, as well as in the categories of age, gender, and body mass index ( P < .05).

Conclusions: Calf circumference is useful in ruling out the presence of sarcopenia while the SARC-F is more effective in ruling in sarcopenia, especially in the context of population-based screening. Future studies should be carried out to investigate the value of population-based sarcopenia detection using these screening tools.

Background and purpose: The literature has associated bone mineral density (BMD) and Alzheimer's disease (AD). The aim of the present systematic review was to investigate BMD in older adults with AD compared with older adults with no dementia.

Methods: Searches were performed in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Web of Science databases from inception to May 2022. Observational studies that compared BMD in the populations of interest were included. Methodical quality (risk of bias) was appraised using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. Standardized mean differences (SMD) were calculated for meta-analyses.

Results and discussion: Five studies were included, involving a total of 1772 older adults (373 with AD and 1399 with no dementia). A first meta-analysis compared 207 older adults with AD and 1243 with no dementia for BMD in the femoral neck. The results showed lower BMD in the AD groups (SMD =-1.52; 95% CI, -2.61 to -0.42; P = .007, low quality of evidence). A second meta-analysis considering different sites of the body (whole body, trunk, femur, and lumbar spine) also showed lower BMD in older adults with AD compared with the group with no dementia (SMD =-0.98; 95% CI, -1.91 to -0.05; P = .04, low quality of evidence). Newcastle-Ottawa Scale scores ranged from 7 to 9, indicating low risk of bias.

Conclusions: Bone mineral density is lower in older adults with AD than in older adults with no dementia, especially in the femoral neck. These results suggest that older adults with AD may be at greater risk of developing osteopenia and osteoporosis. Current clinical practice guidelines should be amended for screening frequency and methodology for this particular cohort. Further studies are needed to confirm whether older people with AD have lower BMD in other sites of the body.

Background and purpose: Balance confidence assessment in older adults has implications for falls prevention and quality of life. It remains unclear whether the original Activities-specific Balance Confidence Scale (ABC-16) or the shortened 6-item scale (ABC-6) is recommended clinically. This study examined ABC-16 and ABC-6 association and agreement, internal consistencies, and relationships with self-rated health (SRH) in community-dwelling older adults.

Methods: Secondary analysis of an existing dataset (N = 77) was performed. Scale association and agreement were assessed with a Spearman ρ correlation (rs), intraclass correlation coefficient, 95% limits of agreement (LoA), and Bland-Altman plot. Cronbach α values were calculated to determine internal consistencies. Separate multiple linear regression models with SRH as the outcome and ABC-6 and ABC-16 scores as primary predictors were estimated and subsequently used to conduct Hotelling t test.

Results and discussion: Participants were primarily female (80.5%) with a median age of 68 years living in the metro Detroit area. The ABC-6 and ABC-16 were closely associated [rs = 0.97, P < .001; intraclass correlation coefficient (2,1) = 0.80] but demonstrated discrepancy (95% LoA range of -3.9 to +18.2; mean difference = 7.2 points in the direction of the ABC-16). Cronbach α values were 0.95 (ABC-16) and 0.89 (ABC-6). Regression model 1 (ABC-6 = primary predictor) explained more of the variance (R2 = 0.36) in SRH compared with model 2 (ABC-16 = primary predictor; R2 = 0.29). Hotelling t test [t(74) = 2.4, P = .008] found that the predicted values from the ABC-6 model were significantly more highly correlated with SRH than those from the ABC-16 model.

Conclusions: Despite a high correlation between the ABC-16 and ABC-6, the 2 scales showed limited agreement and should not be considered interchangeable. Given that the ABC-16 takes longer to administer, does not relate to SRH as strongly, and could have redundant items, the ABC-6 may be preferable to the ABC-16 for balance confidence assessment in older adults living in cold weather, urban, or well-resourced areas.