Physical Activity And Sedentary Behavior In Older Adults With Risk For Mobility Disability

PURPOSE: To examine differences in physical activity (PA) and sedentary behavior in older adults (OAs) living in a Continuing Care Retirement Community (CCRC) as a function of risk for mobility disability. METHODS: 100 OAs (84.7±6.3 years; 27.2±6.8 kg/m2; 70% female) were recruited from a CCRC in the Midwest region of the US. Risk for mobility disability was determined based on scores of the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB). OAs with a score <10 in the SPPB were classified as high risk for mobility disability (HRMD), and those with a score ≥10 were classified as low risk for mobility disability (LRMD). PA was assessed using the Physical Activity Scale for The Elderly (PASE) and expressed as score. Sedentary behavior was assessed using a questionnaire developed for OAs, in which time spent in non-screen- and screen-related activities were computed and expressed as sedentary time (ST) in minutes. Data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. The dependent variables were not normal distributed, therefore, the comparison between LRMD and HRMD was conducted using Mann-Whitney U test with a significance level of P<0.05. RESULTS: 59 percent of OAs were classified as HRMD. Significant differences between groups were observed for total PA (LRMD 67.1±41.8 vs HRMD 49.2±40.5; P=0.012), leisure PA (LRMD 30.5±25.1 vs HRMD 21.2±23.5; P=0.035), total ST (LRMD 645.8±209.6 vs HRMD 567.0±290.8; P=0.007) and non-screen ST (LRMD 447.1±182.7 vs HRMD 350.0±164.8; P= 0.002). Groups with different risk for mobility disability were similar for household PA (LRMD 26.6±19.0 vs HRMD 20.8±20.7; P=0.097), work-related PA (LRMD 10.0±20.5 vs HRMD 7.2±14.9; P=0.533), and screen ST (LRMD 198.8±89.1 vs HRMD 217.0±179.5; P=0.681). CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that OAs living in a CCRC classified as LRMD present with significant higher total and leisure time PA, and significant less total and non-screen ST compared with their counterparts classified as HRMD.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
Published
2024-09-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1249/01.mss.0001057920.94647.ec
Primary Topic
Health and Wellbeing Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Physical Activity And Sedentary Behavior In Older Adults With Risk For Mobility Disability

Émerson Sebastião, Vitor Antonio Assis Alves Siqueira, Jemimah Bakare
Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise
Health and Wellbeing Research
article

Physical Activity And Sedentary Behavior In Older Adults With Risk For Mobility Disability

Émerson Sebastião, Vitor Antonio Assis Alves Siqueira, Jemimah Bakare
article en

Abstract

PURPOSE: To examine differences in physical activity (PA) and sedentary behavior in older adults (OAs) living in a Continuing Care Retirement Community (CCRC) as a function of risk for mobility disability. METHODS: 100 OAs (84.7±6.3 years; 27.2±6.8 kg/m2; 70% female) were recruited from a CCRC in the Midwest region of the US. Risk for mobility disability was determined based on scores of the Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB). OAs with a score <10 in the SPPB were classified as high risk for mobility disability (HRMD), and those with a score ≥10 were classified as low risk for mobility disability (LRMD). PA was assessed using the Physical Activity Scale for The Elderly (PASE) and expressed as score. Sedentary behavior was assessed using a questionnaire developed for OAs, in which time spent in non-screen- and screen-related activities were computed and expressed as sedentary time (ST) in minutes. Data were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. The dependent variables were not normal distributed, therefore, the comparison between LRMD and HRMD was conducted using Mann-Whitney U test with a significance level of P<0.05. RESULTS: 59 percent of OAs were classified as HRMD. Significant differences between groups were observed for total PA (LRMD 67.1±41.8 vs HRMD 49.2±40.5; P=0.012), leisure PA (LRMD 30.5±25.1 vs HRMD 21.2±23.5; P=0.035), total ST (LRMD 645.8±209.6 vs HRMD 567.0±290.8; P=0.007) and non-screen ST (LRMD 447.1±182.7 vs HRMD 350.0±164.8; P= 0.002). Groups with different risk for mobility disability were similar for household PA (LRMD 26.6±19.0 vs HRMD 20.8±20.7; P=0.097), work-related PA (LRMD 10.0±20.5 vs HRMD 7.2±14.9; P=0.533), and screen ST (LRMD 198.8±89.1 vs HRMD 217.0±179.5; P=0.681). CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that OAs living in a CCRC classified as LRMD present with significant higher total and leisure time PA, and significant less total and non-screen ST compared with their counterparts classified as HRMD.

Medicine & Science in Sports & ExerciseVol. 56(10S)
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 73%
Health and Wellbeing Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.