Purpose: To establish age-related, normal limits of monocular and binocular spatial vision under photopic and mesopic conditions. Methods: Photopic and mesopic visual acuity (VA) and contrast thresholds (CTs) were measured with both positive and negative contrast optotypes under binocular and monocular viewing conditions using the Acuity-Plus (AP) test. The experiments were carried out on participants (age range from 10 to 86 years), who met pre-established, normal sight criteria. Mean and ± 2.5σ limits were calculated within each 5-year subgroup. A biologically meaningful model was then fitted to predict mean values and upper and lower threshold limits for VA and CT as a function of age. The best-fit model parameters describe normal aging of spatial vision for each of the 16 experimental conditions investigated. Results: Out of the 382 participants recruited for this study, 285 participants passed the selection criteria for normal aging. Log transforms were applied to ensure approximate normal distributions. Outliers were also removed for each of the 16 stimulus conditions investigated based on the ±2.5σ limit criterion. VA, CTs and the overall variability were found to be age-invariant up to ~50 years in the photopic condition. A lower, age-invariant limit of ~30 years was more appropriate for the mesopic range with a gradual, but accelerating increase in both mean thresholds and intersubject variability above this age. Binocular thresholds were smaller and much less variable when compared to the thresholds measured in either eye. Results with negative contrast optotypes were significantly better than the corresponding results measured with positive contrast (p < 0.004). Conclusions: This project has established the expected age limits of spatial vision for monocular and binocular viewing under photopic and high mesopic lighting with both positive and negative contrast optotypes using a single test, which can be implemented either in the clinic or in an occupational setting.
DOCUMENT
Objective: To obtain insight into (a) the prevalence of nursing staff–experienced barriers regarding the promotion of functional activity among nursing home residents, and (b) the association between these barriers and nursing staff–perceived promotion of functional activity. Method: Barriers experienced by 368 nurses from 41 nursing homes in the Netherlands were measured with the MAastrIcht Nurses Activity INventory (MAINtAIN)-barriers; perceived promotion of functional activities was measured with the MAINtAIN-behaviors. Descriptive statistics and hierarchical linear regression analyses were performed. Results: Most often experienced barriers were staffing levels, capabilities of residents, and availability of resources. Barriers that were most strongly associated with the promotion of functional activity were communication within the team, (a lack of) referral to responsibilities, and care routines. Discussion: Barriers that are most often experienced among nursing staff are not necessarily the barriers that are most strongly associated with nursing staff–perceived promotion of functional activity.
DOCUMENT
BACKGROUND: Nursing home residents are mainly inactive. Nursing staff can encourage residents to perform functional activities during daily care activities. This study examines 1) the extent to which nursing staff perceive that they encourage functional activity in nursing home residents and 2) the associations between these nursing behaviors and professional characteristics, contextual factors, and information-seeking behaviors. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, 368 registered nurses and certified nurse assistants, working in somatic and psychogeriatric wards of forty-one nursing homes throughout the Netherlands participated. Self-reported data were collected with a questionnaire, comprising the MAINtAIN-behaviors, which assesses the extent to which nursing staff encourage functional activities, including different activities of daily living (ADL), household activities, and miscellaneous encouraging activities (e.g., discouraging informal caregivers from taking over activities residents can do themselves). Additional data collected included professional characteristics (e.g., age), contextual factors (e.g., ward type), and information-seeking behaviors (e.g., reading professional journals). Descriptive statistics were used to determine the extent to which functional activities were encouraged. Hierarchical linear regression analyses were performed to determine the associations between the encouragement of functional activities and other factors. RESULTS: Nursing staff perceived that household activities (mean 4.1 (scale range 1-9), SD 1.9) were less often encouraged than ADL (mean 6.9, SD 1.2) or miscellaneous activities (mean 6.7, SD 1.5). The percentage of nursing staff stating that different household activities, ADL, or miscellaneous activities were almost always encouraged ranged from 11 to 45%, 41 to 86%, and 50 to 83% per activity, respectively. The extent to which these activities were encouraged differed for some of the professional characteristics, contextual factors, or information-seeking behaviors, but no consistent pattern in associations emerged. CONCLUSIONS: According to nursing staff, household activities are not as often encouraged as ADL or miscellaneous activities. Professional characteristics, contextual factors, and information-seeking behaviors are not consistently associated with the encouragement of functional activity. Nursing staff should also focus on improving the encouragement of household activities. Future research could examine the role of other factors in encouraging functional activity, such as experienced barriers, and assess to what extent the perception of nursing staff corresponds with their actual behavior.
DOCUMENT
Background: The concept of Functional Independence (FI), defined as ‘functioning physically safe and independent from other persons, within one’s context”, plays an important role in maintaining the functional ability to enable well-being in older age. FI is a dynamic and complex concept covering four clinical outcomes: physical capacity, empowerment, coping flexibility, and health literacy. As the level of FI differs widely between older adults, healthcare professionals must gain insight into how to best support older people in maintaining their level of FI in a personalized manner. Insight into subgroups of FI could be a first step in providing personalized support This study aims to identify clinically relevant, distinct subgroups of FI in Dutch community-dwelling older people and subsequently describe them according to individual characteristics. Results: One hundred fifty-three community-dwelling older persons were included for participation. Cluster analysis identified four distinctive clusters: (1) Performers – Well-informed; this subgroup is physically strong, well-informed and educated, independent, non-falling, with limited reflective coping style. (2) Performers – Achievers: physically strong people with a limited coping style and health literacy level. (3) The reliant- Good Coper representing physically somewhat limited people with sufficient coping styles who receive professional help. (4) The reliant – Receivers: physically limited people with insufficient coping styles who receive professional help. These subgroups showed significant differences in demographic characteristics and clinical FI outcomes. Conclusions: Community-dwelling older persons can be allocated to four distinct and clinically relevant subgroups based on their level of FI. This subgrouping provides insight into the complex holistic concept of FI by pointing out for each subgroup which FI domain is affected. This way, it helps to better target interventions to prevent the decline of FI in the community-dwelling older population.
DOCUMENT
Background: Over the years, a plethora of frailty assessment tools has been developed. These instruments can be basically grouped into two types of conceptualizations – unidimensional, based on the physical–biological dimension – and multidimensional, based on the connections among the physical, psychological, and social domains. At present, studies on the comparison between uni- and multidimensional frailty measures are limited. Objective: The aims of this paper were: 1) to compare the prevalence of frailty obtained using a uni- and a multidimensional measure; 2) to analyze differences in the functional status among individuals captured as frail or robust by the two measures; and 3) to investigate relations between the two frailty measures and disability.
DOCUMENT
Objective:This study investigated whether visual function is associated with cognitive activity engagement and mild cognitive impairment in middle-aged and elderly individuals. Method:This cross-sectional study was conducted on 120 individuals aged 50–89. The Florida Cognitive Activity Scale (FCAS) was used to assess cognitive activity engagement. Visual function was assessed by near visual acuity(nVA) and contrast sensitivity (CS), and both combined to obtain a visual function (VF) compound score. Multi-variable linear regression models, adjusted for confounders, were used to assess the association between the determinants and FCAS. Results:After confounder adjustment, nVA was not associated with overall cognitive activity engagement. CS was significantly associated with the FCAS“Higher Cognitive Abilities”subscale score (BHC= 5.5 [95% CI 1.3; 9.7]).Adjustment for nVA attenuated the association between CS and engagement in tasks of Higher Cognitive Abilities(BHC= 4.7 [95% CI 0.1; 9.3]).In retired individuals(N= 87), theVF compound score was associated with a lower Cognitive Activity Scale score(BCA=−1.2 [95% CI−2.3;−0.1]), lower Higher Cognitive Abilities score(BHC=−0.7 [95% CI−1.3;−0.1])and lower Frequent Cognitive Abilities score (BFA=−0.5 [95% CI−0.9;−0.1]). Conclusion:CS, but not nVA, plays a role in engagement in tasks associated with Higher Cognitive Abilities in middle-aged and elderly individuals. In retired individuals, the VF compound score is associated with lower Cognitive Activity score, lower Higher Cognitive Abilities score and lower Frequent Cognitive Abilities score.
LINK
Background: Functional decline is common in nursing home residents. Nursing staff can help prevent this decline, by encouraging residents to be more active in functional activities. Questionnaires measuring the extent to which nursing staff encourage functional activity among residents are lacking. In addition, there are no measurement instruments to gain insight into nursing staff perceived barriers and facilitators to this behavior. The aim of this study was to develop, and study the usability, of the MAastrIcht Nurses Activities INventory (MAINtAIN), an inventory assessing a) the extent to which nursing staff perceive to perform behaviors that optimize and maintain functional activity among nursing home residents and b) the perceived barriers and facilitators related to this behavior. Methods: Using a mixed-methods approach the MAINtAIN was developed and its usability was studied. Development was based on literature, expert opinions, focus group (N = 3) and individual interviews (N = 14) with residents and staff from nine nursing homes in the Netherlands. Usability was studied in a cross-sectional study with 37 nurses and certified nurse assistants; data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results: Development of the MAINtAIN resulted in two distinctive parts: MAINtAIN-behaviors and MAINtAIN-barriers. MAINtAIN-behaviors, targeting nursing staff behavior to optimize and maintain functional activity, includes 19 items covering activities of daily living, household activities, and miscellaneous activities. MAINtAIN-barriers addresses the perceived barriers and facilitators related to this behavior and comprises 33 items covering barriers and facilitators related to the residents, the professionals, the social context, and the organizational and economic context. The usability study showed that the inventory was not difficult to complete, that items and response options were clear,and that the number of missing values was low. Few items showed a floor or ceiling effect. Conclusions: The newly developed inventory MAINtAIN provides a usable method for researchers and nursing homes to obtain insight into nursing staff perceived behavior in optimizing functional activity among residents and their perceived barriers and facilitators related to this behavior. Outcomes of the MAINtAIN may contribute to change in nursing staff behavior and may improve nursing care. Further research with regard to the psychometric properties of the MAINtAIN is recommended.
MULTIFILE
The sensitivity of tropical forest carbon to climate is a key uncertainty in predicting global climate change. Although short-term drying and warming are known to affect forests, it is unknown if such effects translate into long-term responses. Here, we analyze 590 permanent plots measured across the tropics to derive the equilibrium climate controls on forest carbon. Maximum temperature is the most important predictor of aboveground biomass (−9.1 megagrams of carbon per hectare per degree Celsius), primarily by reducing woody productivity, and has a greater impact per °C in the hottest forests (>32.2°C). Our results nevertheless reveal greater thermal resilience than observations of short-term variation imply. To realize the long-term climate adaptation potential of tropical forests requires both protecting them and stabilizing Earth’s climate.
DOCUMENT
The aim of this study was to assess the predictive ability of the frailty phenotype (FP), Groningen Frailty Indicator (GFI), Tilburg Frailty Indicator (TFI) and frailty index (FI) for the outcomes mortality, hospitalization and increase in dependency in (instrumental) activities of daily living ((I)ADL) among older persons. This prospective cohort study with 2-year follow-up included 2420 Dutch community-dwelling older people (65+, mean age 76.3±6.6 years, 39.5% male) who were pre-frail or frail according to the FP. Mortality data were obtained from Statistics Netherlands. All other data were self-reported. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) was calculated for each frailty instrument and outcome measure. The prevalence of frailty, sensitivity and specifcity were calculated using cutoff values proposed by the developers and cutoff values one above and one below the proposed ones (0.05 for FI). All frailty instruments poorly predicted mortality, hospitalization and (I)ADL dependency (AUCs between 0.62–0.65, 0.59–0.63 and 0.60–0.64, respectively). Prevalence estimates of frailty in this population varied between 22.2% (FP) and 64.8% (TFI). The FP and FI showed higher levels of specifcity, whereas sensitivity was higher for the GFI and TFI. Using a different cutoff point considerably changed the prevalence, sensitivity and specifcity. In conclusion, the predictive ability of the FP, GFI, TFI and FI was poor for all outcomes in a population of pre-frail and frail community-dwelling older people. The FP and the FI showed higher values of specifcity, whereas sensitivity was higher for the GFI and TFI.
DOCUMENT
Background: Due to differences in the definition of frailty, many different screening instruments have been developed. However, the predictive validity of these instruments among community-dwelling older people remains uncertain. Objective: To investigate whether combined (i.e. sequential or parallel) use of available frailty instruments improves the predictive power of dependency in (instrumental) activities of daily living ((I)ADL), mortality and hospitalization. Design, setting and participants: A prospective cohort study with two-year followup was conducted among pre-frail and frail community-dwelling older people in the Netherlands. Measurements: Four combinations of two highly specific frailty instruments (Frailty Phenotype, Frailty Index) and two highly sensitive instruments (Tilburg Frailty Indicator, Groningen Frailty Indicator) were investigated. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) for all single instruments as well as for the four combinations, sequential and parallel. Results: 2,420 individuals participated (mean age 76.3 ± 6.6 years, 60.5% female) in our study. Sequential use increased the levels of specificity, as expected, whereas the PPV hardly increased. Parallel use increased the levels of sensitivity, although the NPV hardly increased. Conclusions: Applying two frailty instruments sequential or parallel might not be a solution for achieving better predictions of frailty in community-dwelling older people. Our results show that the combination of different screening instruments does not improve predictive validity. However, as this is one of the first studies to investigate the combined use of screening instruments, we recommend further exploration of other combinations of instruments among other study populations.
DOCUMENT
