ABSTRACT
Objectives: Increasing activity levels in older people is important for maintaining quality of life and ameliorating the risks of morbidity related to falls, depression, and dementia. This study aimed to clarify the seasonal variation effects on total energy expenditure, number of steps, time spent in low- and moderate- or high-intensity physical activities, and daily activities performed.Patients and Methods: This was a cross-sectional study of 22 community-dwelling older individuals (3 men, 19 women; mean age, 75.1 ± 7.3 years) living in three districts of Gero, Gifu, who participated in the Gero Salon Project hosted by the Social Welfare Councils. Evaluations were conducted in each season from September 2016 to August 2017. We used a uniaxial accelerometer, the Lifecorder device, which measures physical activity, and the Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly to evaluate activities of daily living. Data were analyzed using the multiple comparisons (Bonferroni correction) method.Results: Total energy expenditure and time spent in moderate- or high-intensity activities did not show seasonal variations. However, the lowest number of steps was taken during the winter, and the number of steps increased significantly from winter to spring. The time spent in low-intensity physical activities was significantly longer in the spring and summer than in the winter. There was no significant seasonal difference in total Physical Activity Scale for the Elderly score, leisure activities, domestic activities, or work-related activities. However, there was a significant difference between the summer and winter scores in “outdoor gardening,” with the lowest score observed during the winter.Conclusions: With climate changes in the winter months, “outdoor gardening” becomes difficult, thus decreasing the number of steps taken. Therefore, it is necessary to identify other ways for older people to maintain physical activity during the winter season.
ABSTRACT
<b>Objective: </b>A perception survey of healthcare providers and pharmaceutical industries about the current package insert (PI) was conducted to evaluate whether its layout and issues such as the contents concerning drug-drug interactions are found appropriate.<br><b>Methods: </b>A questionnaire was sent via the Internet to physicians of various subspecialties, or via the postal service to pharmacy-employed pharmacists and pharmaceutical industries. It consisted of questions regarding the PI layout, the information contents on drug-drug interactions and other matters about PI revision.<br><b>Results: </b>The survey showed that the PI is a major source of drug information for physicians (82.4%) and pharmacists (98.7%). The layout (order of appearance of headings and information about drug interactions in a tabular format) of the current PI is widely accepted by physicians, pharmacists, and pharmaceutical industries. There was, however, some degree of disagreement within these three groups in the perceptions about the presentation/contents of the several drug interactions, as well as about the timing for its updating. Around 24% of physicians and 35% of pharmacists view that the content of drug interactions is insufficient, and that information about adverse drug reactions and drug interactions is not enough updated in the PIs. On the other hand, near 86% of pharmaceutical industries were prone to wait for accumulation of enough data until revising the information in PIs.<br><b>Conclusions: </b>Differences of perception were found between healthcare providers (<i>i.e</i>., PI users) and industries. Our survey revealed that the basic layout of the current PI should be preserved, but there are issues such as the contents and updating of information regarding drug interactions and adverse drug interactions that may require modifications according to the healthcare providers’ point of view.