Molly A Mather, Emily H Ho, Katy Bedjeti, Tatiana Karpouzian-Rogers, Emily J Rogalski, Richard Gershon, Sandra Weintraub
{"title":"使用美国国立卫生研究院工具箱测量高龄老人的多维健康状况:ARMADA 研究的结果。","authors":"Molly A Mather, Emily H Ho, Katy Bedjeti, Tatiana Karpouzian-Rogers, Emily J Rogalski, Richard Gershon, Sandra Weintraub","doi":"10.1093/arclin/acad105","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The percentage of older adults living into their 80s and beyond is expanding rapidly. Characterization of typical cognitive performance in this population is complicated by a dearth of normative data for the oldest old. Additionally, little attention has been paid to other aspects of health, such as motor, sensory, and emotional functioning, that may interact with cognitive changes to predict quality of life and well-being. The current study used the NIH Toolbox (NIHTB) to determine age group differences between persons aged 65-84 and 85+ with normal cognition.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Participants were recruited in two age bands (i.e., 65-84 and 85+). All participants completed the NIHTB Cognition, Motor, Sensation, and Emotion modules. Independent-samples t-tests determined age group differences with post-hoc adjustments using Bonferroni corrections. All subtest and composite scores were then regressed on age and other demographic covariates.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The 65-84 group obtained significantly higher scores than the 85+ group across all cognitive measures except oral reading, all motor measures except gait speed, and all sensation measures except pain interference. Age remained a significant predictor after controlling for covariates. Age was not significantly associated with differences in emotion scores.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Results support the use of the NIHTB in persons over 85 with normal cognition. As expected, fluid reasoning abilities and certain motor and sensory functions decreased with age in the oldest old. Inclusion of motor and sensation batteries is warranted when studying trajectories of aging in the oldest old to allow for multidimensional characterization of health.</p>","PeriodicalId":8176,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology","volume":" ","pages":"535-546"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11269891/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Measuring Multidimensional Aspects of Health in the Oldest Old Using the NIH Toolbox: Results From the ARMADA Study.\",\"authors\":\"Molly A Mather, Emily H Ho, Katy Bedjeti, Tatiana Karpouzian-Rogers, Emily J Rogalski, Richard Gershon, Sandra Weintraub\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/arclin/acad105\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The percentage of older adults living into their 80s and beyond is expanding rapidly. Characterization of typical cognitive performance in this population is complicated by a dearth of normative data for the oldest old. Additionally, little attention has been paid to other aspects of health, such as motor, sensory, and emotional functioning, that may interact with cognitive changes to predict quality of life and well-being. The current study used the NIH Toolbox (NIHTB) to determine age group differences between persons aged 65-84 and 85+ with normal cognition.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Participants were recruited in two age bands (i.e., 65-84 and 85+). All participants completed the NIHTB Cognition, Motor, Sensation, and Emotion modules. Independent-samples t-tests determined age group differences with post-hoc adjustments using Bonferroni corrections. All subtest and composite scores were then regressed on age and other demographic covariates.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The 65-84 group obtained significantly higher scores than the 85+ group across all cognitive measures except oral reading, all motor measures except gait speed, and all sensation measures except pain interference. Age remained a significant predictor after controlling for covariates. Age was not significantly associated with differences in emotion scores.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Results support the use of the NIHTB in persons over 85 with normal cognition. As expected, fluid reasoning abilities and certain motor and sensory functions decreased with age in the oldest old. Inclusion of motor and sensation batteries is warranted when studying trajectories of aging in the oldest old to allow for multidimensional characterization of health.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8176,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"535-546\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11269891/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acad105\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/arclin/acad105","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Measuring Multidimensional Aspects of Health in the Oldest Old Using the NIH Toolbox: Results From the ARMADA Study.
Objective: The percentage of older adults living into their 80s and beyond is expanding rapidly. Characterization of typical cognitive performance in this population is complicated by a dearth of normative data for the oldest old. Additionally, little attention has been paid to other aspects of health, such as motor, sensory, and emotional functioning, that may interact with cognitive changes to predict quality of life and well-being. The current study used the NIH Toolbox (NIHTB) to determine age group differences between persons aged 65-84 and 85+ with normal cognition.
Method: Participants were recruited in two age bands (i.e., 65-84 and 85+). All participants completed the NIHTB Cognition, Motor, Sensation, and Emotion modules. Independent-samples t-tests determined age group differences with post-hoc adjustments using Bonferroni corrections. All subtest and composite scores were then regressed on age and other demographic covariates.
Results: The 65-84 group obtained significantly higher scores than the 85+ group across all cognitive measures except oral reading, all motor measures except gait speed, and all sensation measures except pain interference. Age remained a significant predictor after controlling for covariates. Age was not significantly associated with differences in emotion scores.
Conclusions: Results support the use of the NIHTB in persons over 85 with normal cognition. As expected, fluid reasoning abilities and certain motor and sensory functions decreased with age in the oldest old. Inclusion of motor and sensation batteries is warranted when studying trajectories of aging in the oldest old to allow for multidimensional characterization of health.
期刊介绍:
The journal publishes original contributions dealing with psychological aspects of the etiology, diagnosis, and treatment of disorders arising out of dysfunction of the central nervous system. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology will also consider manuscripts involving the established principles of the profession of neuropsychology: (a) delivery and evaluation of services, (b) ethical and legal issues, and (c) approaches to education and training. Preference will be given to empirical reports and key reviews. Brief research reports, case studies, and commentaries on published articles (not exceeding two printed pages) will also be considered. At the discretion of the editor, rebuttals to commentaries may be invited. Occasional papers of a theoretical nature will be considered.