Search

Purpose This study aims to verify that the mental-cognitive domain of the validated generic bio-functional status (BFS)/bio-functional age (BFA) assessment tool, incorporating the concept of Active and Healthy Ageing (AHA), reflects cognitive performance. In addition, the effects of chronic stress exposure on the mental-cognitive BFS/BFA should be investigated. Methods The study was carried out as a monocenter, cross-sectional, observational, non-interventional trial (Bern Cohort Study 2014, BeCS-14) with the participation of 147 non-pediatric, non-geriatric subjects. All participants followed a standardized battery of biopsychosocial assessments consisting of BFS/BFA, a validated cognitive performance test battery (Inventar zur Gedächtnisdiagnostik; IGD) and a validated questionnaire for the assessment of chronic stress (Trier Inventory for the assessment of Chronic Stress; TICS), respectively. Results Mean cognitive performance was average and higher in younger or better educated individuals. The BFA of the participants was 7.8 ± 7.8 year-equivalents below their chronological age. The mental-cognitive BFS/BFA assessment correlated well with the validated questionnaire for cognition assessment, the IGD. Further, three TICS subdomains (work overload (r = − 0.246, p = 0.003), work discontent (r = − 0.299, p = 0.006) and pressure to succeed (r = − 0.274, p Conclusions Our study shows that the BFS/BFA assessment tool follows European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing (EIP-AHA) requirements. Further, we could demonstrate that higher levels of chronic work-related stress may be associated with poorer mental-cognitive performance and a pro-aging state indicating that cognitive impairments can be reduced by stress management interventions.

OBJECTIVES In this study we compared the chronological and bio-functional age between two German speaking cohorts 30 years apart applying a comprehensive and generic Active and Healthy Aging (AHA) assessment model incorporating ICF. METHODS Single-centre, cross-sectional, observational, non-interventional, non-randomized trial at an University based women's hospital, division of Gynecological Endocrinology and Reproductive Medicine. All participants followed a standardized, holistic battery of biopsychosocial assessments consisting of bio-functional status (BFS), bio-functional age (BFA) and additional validated psychometric questionnaires. RESULTS 462 non-pediatric, non-geriatric females were in the BeCS-14 cohort. The measured mean BFA was lower than the chronological age within the BeCS-14 cohort (regression coefficient 0.58) and comparable in the female LeCS-84 subcohort (regression coefficient age 0.85, communality age 76%). In detail, within the decades 35-45 years and 55-65 years the gradient of BFA increase (aging rate) was similar in both cohorts (decade 35-45 years: LeCS-84 4.08 ± 1.03 year equivalents and BeCS-14 4.78 ± 1.67 year equivalents; decade 55-65 years: LeCS-84 6.21 ± 1.29 year equivalents and BeCS-14 5.25 ± 1.18 year equivalents). Remarkably, within the LeCS-84 cohort the mean aging rate within the decade 45-55 years was significantly different from all other aging rates in both cohorts: 13.02 ± 1.05 year equivalents. However, within the BeCS-14 cohort the corresponding value was 4.83 ± 1.02 year equivalents thus indicating a continuous aging process across the adult life course. In BeCS-14, there was a significant age-related effect for cardiovascular performance and social stress exposition and younger age was associated with better cardiovascular performance while level of social stress exposition decreased in aging women. CONCLUSION When comparing BeCS-14 and LeCS-84, the aging process seemed to be accelerated in women in LeCS-84 between 45 and 54 years of age. We can only speculate on the reasons, such as differences in the health care, political and social system. However, the differences observed support the use of our BFS/BFA assessment tool not only on an individual level (strengths/resources) but also population level following EIP-AHA requirements. Yet, it remains to be developed how the assessed health strengths/resources-profile may be integrated into AHA management.

The aim of the study was to represent chronic stress exposure by a complex generic Active and Healthy (AHA) diagnostic assessment tool incorporating ICF. This is a single-centre, cross-sectional, observational, non-interventional, non-randomized trial in University based women’s hospital, division of Gynecological Endocrinology and Reproductive Medicine. All participants followed a standardized, holistic battery of biopsychosocial assessments consisting of bio-functional status (BFS), bio-functional age (BFA) and the questionnaire for chronic stress exposure (TICS). 624 non-pediatric, non-geriatric subjects were recruited in the BeCS-14 cohort. The mean difference between chronological age and BFA was 7.8 ± 8.0 year equivalents. The mean stress level score assessed by SSCS was 13.2 with 45.4% being exposed to above average stress intensity. 22 BFS items (14 objective, 7 subjective) significantly correlated with chronic stress exposure (TICS-SSCS). The constructed sum score composed of SOC_L9 and complaint questionnaire (physical and emotional wellbeing) represented chronic stress exposure best (pearson-correlation value 0.564, p