PurposeTo determine which factors are associated with physical inactivity in hospitalized adults of all ages.MethodsA cross-sectional sample of 114 adults admitted to a gastrointestinal surgery, internal medicine or cardiology hospital ward (median age 60, length of stay 13 days) were observed during one random day from 8 am to 8 pm using wireless accelerometers and behavioral mapping protocols. Factors (e.g., comorbidities, self-efficacy, independence in mobility, functional restraints) were collected from medical records, surveys, and observations.ResultsPatients were physically active for median(IQR) 26 (13–52.3) min and were observed to lie in bed for 67.3%, sit for 25.2%, stand for 2.5%, and walk for 5.0% of the time. Multivariable regression analysis revealed that physical inactivity was 159.87% (CI = 89.84; 255.73) higher in patients dependent in basic mobility, and 58.88% (CI = 10.08; 129.33) higher in patients with a urinary catheter (adjusted R2 = 0.52). The fit of our multivariable regression analysis did not improve after adding hospital ward to the analysis (p > 0.05).ConclusionsIndependence in mobility and urine catheter presence are two important factors associated with physical inactivity in hospitalized adults of all ages, and these associations do not differ between hospital wards. Routine assessments of both factors may therefore help to identify physically inactive patients throughout the hospital.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONHealthcare professionals should be aware that physical inactivity during hospital stay may result into functional decline.Regardless of which hospital ward patients are admitted to, once patients require assistance in basic mobility or have a urinary catheter they are at risk of physical inactivity during hospital stay.Implementing routine assessments on the independence of basic mobility and urine catheter presence may therefore assist healthcare professionals in identifying physically inactive patients before they experience functional decline.
MULTIFILE
The sense of safety and security of older people is a widely acknowledged action domain for policy and practice in age-friendly cities. Despite an extensive body of knowledge on the matter, the theory is fragmented, and a classification is lacking. Therefore, this study investigated how older people experience the sense of safety and security in an age-friendly city. A total of four focus group sessions were organised in The Hague comprising 38 older people. Based on the outcomes of the sessions, the sense of safety and security was classified into two main domains: a sense of safety and security impacted by intentional acts and negligence (for instance, burglary and violence), and a sense of safety and security impacted by non-intentional acts (for instance, incidents, making mistakes online). Both domains manifest into three separate contexts, namely the home environment, the outdoor environment and traffic and the digital environment. In the discussions with older people on these derived domains, ideas for potential improvements and priorities were also explored, which included access to information on what older people can do themselves to improve their sense of safety and security, the enforcement of rules, and continuous efforts to develop digital skills to improve safety online. Original article at MDPI; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19073960
MULTIFILE
In the aviation sector, the variability in the appreciation of safety risk perception factors and responses to risk behaviours has not been sufficiently studied for engineers and technicians. Through a questionnaire survey, this study investigated differences amongst professionals and trainees across eleven risk perception factors and five indicative risk behaviour scenarios. The findings indicated significant differences between the two groups in four factors and three scenarios as well as within groups. Moreover, age, years of work and study and educational level were other factors accounting for such differences within each group of professionals and trainees. The results showing these significant differences are aligned with relevant research about pilots and indicate that the appreciation of risk perception factors by aviation engineers and the development of their risk behaviours deserves more attention. Our findings cannot be generalised due to the small sample and its distribution across the demographic variables. However, the results of this study suggest the need tailoring risk communication and training to address the different degrees to which influences of risk perception factors are comprehended, and risk behaviours emerge in aviation engineering trainees and professionals. Further research could focus on the development of a respective uniform framework and tool for the specific workforce group and could administer surveys to more extensive and more representative samples by including open-ended questions and broader social, organisational and systemic factors.
