Search

Objectives: Clinical interpretability of the gait speed and 5-times sit-to-stand (5-STS) tests is commonly established by comparing older adults with and without self-reported mobility limitations (SRML) on gait speed and 5-STS performance, and estimating clinical cutpoints for SRML using the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) method. Accumulating evidence, however, suggests that the adjusted predictive modeling (APM) method may be more appropriate to estimate these interpretational cutpoints. Thus, we aimed to compare, in community-dwelling older adults, gait speed and 5-STS cutpoints estimated using the ROC and APM methods. Design: Cross-sectional study. Setting and Participants: This study analyzed data from 955 community-dwelling independently walking older adults (73%women) aged ≥60 years (mean, 68; range, 60–88). Methods: Participants completed the 10-metre gait speed and 5-STS tests. Participants were classified as having SRML if they responded "Yes" to either of the 2 questions regarding walking and stair climbing difficulty. Cutpoints for SRML and its component questions were estimated using ROC analysis with Youden criterion and the APM method. Results: The proportions of participants with self-reported walking difficulty, self-reported stair climbing difficulty, and SRML were 10%, 19%, and 22%, respectively. Gait speed and 5-STS time were moderately correlated with each other (r=-0.56) and with the self-reported measures (absolute r-values, 0.39–0.44). ROC-based gait speed cutpoints were 0.14 to 0.16 m/s greater than APM-based cutpoints (P < 0.05) whilst ROC-based 5-STS time cutpoints were 0.8 to 3.3 s lower than APM-based cutpoints (P < 0.05 for walking difficulty). Compared with ROC-based cutpoints, APM-based cutptoints were more precise and they varied monotonically with self-reported walking difficulty, self-reported stair climbing difficulty, and SRML. Conclusions and implications: In a sample of 955 older adults, our findings of precise and biologically plausible gait speed and 5-STS cutpoints for SRML estimated using the APM method indicate that this promising method could potentially complement or even replace traditional ROC methods.

In order to account for the variability in gait speed due to demographic factors, an observed gait speed value can be compared with its predicted value based on age, sex, and body height (observed gait speed divided by predicted gait speed, termed "GS%predicted" henceforth). This study aimed to examine the screening accuracy of an optimal GS%predicted threshold for prefrailty/frailty.This cross-sectional study included 998 community-dwelling ambulant participants aged50 years (mean age = 68 years). Participants completed a multi-domain geriatric screen and a physical fitness assessment, from which the 10-m habitual gait speed, GS%predicted, Physical Frailty Phenotype (PFP) index, and 36-item Frailty Index (FI) were computed.Based on the FI, ~49% of participants had pre-frailty or frailty. The optimal threshold of GS%predicted (0.93) had greater screening accuracy than the 1.0 m/s fixed threshold for gait speed (AUC, 0.65 vs. 0.60; DeLong's P 0.001). Replacing gait speed with GS%predicted in the PFP improved its overall discrimination (AUC, 0.70 vs. 0.67 of original PFP; DeLong's P 0.001).Defining a "slow" gait speed by a GS%predicted value of0.93 provided greater screening accuracy than the traditional 1.0 m/s threshold for gait speed. Our results also support the use of GS%predicted-derived PFP to identify older adults at risk of prefrailty/frailty. Geriatr Gerontol Int 2022; 22: 575-580.

Slow gait speed and sit-to-stand performance are associated with adverse clinical outcomes in older adults. Identifying older adults with functional performance "below norms" is the first step toward prevention. We aimed to (1) examine the associations of age, body height, and gender with gait speed and sit-to-stand performance and (2) develop subgroup-specific reference ranges in older adults with no self-reported mobility limitations.Cross-sectional study.This study analyzed data from 775 community-dwelling older adults who reported no difficulty walking 100 m, climbing stairs, and rising from the chair.Gait speed and sit-to-stand performance were measured by the 10-m gait speed test and 5-times sit-to-stand test, respectively. Bayesian linear regression was used to derive 95% reference ranges for gait speed and sit-to-stand performance, defined by different levels of age, body height, and gender.Overall, 95% reference range was 0.89-1.79 m/s for habitual gait speed and 7.4-27.9 stands/30 s for sit-to-stand pace. Age had the highest posterior probability (99%) of a meaningful association with both functional outcomes. Additionally, height was strongly associated with gait speed: a 10-cm increase in height was associated with 0.07 m/s (95% credible interval, 0.05-0.10) faster gait speed. For sit-to-stand test, the lower 95% reference range limits tended to be similar across gender and gender-specific height subgroups, owing to the associations of faster sit-to-stand pace with shorter height and male gender. Because extensive tables of reference ranges are impractical, a web-based application (https://sghpt.shinyapps.io/ippts/) is created to provide subgroup-specific reference ranges.In a large sample of mobile-intact older adults, reference ranges for gait speed and sit-to-stand performance differed meaningfully by age. Furthermore, gait speed was stature dependent. Although requiring validation, our findings may be used to define subgroup-specific "below-range" values and to complement existing universal clinical cut points for gait speed and sit-to-stand performance.

Objectives: To determine associations of inter- and intra-muscular adipose tissue (IMAT) with cardiometabolic health and physical function in older adults. Methods: 48 community-dwelling older adults aged ≥65 years (mean 71.6±4.8 years; 52% women) underwent whole-body dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry, to assess appendicular lean mass (ALM), and peripheral quantitative computed tomography (pQCT; 66% tibia), to assess calf IMAT cross-sectional area ([CSA]; cm2 ) and muscle density (mg/cm3 ; higher values indicate lower fat infiltration). Fasting glucose, lipids, triglycerides and C-reactive protein (CRP) were analysed. Physical function was assessed by postural sway (computerised posturography; N=41), and gait analysis (GAITRite Electronic Walkway; N=40). Results: Higher IMAT CSA and muscle density were associated with significantly higher (B=0.85 95%CI [0.34, 1.36]) and lower (-2.14 [-4.20, -0.08]) CRP and higher (0.93 [0.56, 1.30]) and lower postural sway (-3.12 [-4.74, -1.50]), respectively, after adjustment for age, sex and ALM/BMI. Higher IMAT CSA was associated with slower gait speed and cadence, and greater step time and step width (all P