Factors Influencing Mobility During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Community-Dwelling Older Adults.

OBJECTIVE: To describe and identify factors influencing mobility among older adults during the first 5 months of the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: A cross-sectional telesurvey. SETTING: Community dwelling older adults, situated within the first 5 months of the COVID-19 pandemic, in Hamilton, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: A random sample of 2343 older adults were approached to be in the study, of which 247 completed the survey (N=247). Eligible participants were aged ≥65 years. INTERVENTIONS: Not applicable. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Mobility was measured using global rating of change items and the Late Life Function Instrument (LLFI). Multivariate linear regression models were used to examine the association between mobility and related factors based on Webber's model. RESULTS: 247 older adults (29% male, mean age 78±7.3 years) completed surveys between May and August 2020. Respectively, 26%, 10%, and 9%, rated their ability to engage in physical activity, housework, and move around their home as worse compared with the start of the pandemic. The mean LLFI score was 60.9±13.4. In the model, walking volume (ß=0.03 95% confidence interval 0.013, 0.047), fall history (ß=-0.04, 95% confidence interval -0.08, -0.04), male sex (ß=0.06, 95% confidence interval 0.02, 0.09), unpleasant neighborhood (ß=-0.06, 95% confidence interval -0.11, -0.02), musculoskeletal pain (ß=-0.07, 95% confidence interval -0.11, -0.03), and self-reported health (ß=0.08, 95% confidence interval 0.03, 0.13) had the strongest associations with LLFI scores and explained 64% of the variance in the LLFI score. CONCLUSIONS: Physical and environmental factors may help explain poorer mobility during lockdowns. Future research should examine these associations longitudinally to see if factors remain consistent over time and could be targeted for rehabilitation.

People with COPD have greater participation restrictions than age-matched older adults without respiratory conditions assessed during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Participation restriction has detrimental effects for older adults but it is unknown how participation differs for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) compared to older adults of the same age without respiratory conditions. We compared scores on the Late Life Disability Instrument (LLDI) between people with COPD (study group) and a random sample of older adults (control group). METHODS: Participants with COPD (study group) were recruited from two hospitals in Ontario and age- and sex-matched with a ratio of 1:2 with participants from a random sample of community-dwelling older adults who did not report having respiratory conditions (control group). The study group completed the LLDI prior to the COVID-19 pandemic and the control group completed the LLDI at the end of the first wave of the pandemic. LLDI frequency and limitation scores were compared between groups using Wilcoxon rank-sum tests. RESULTS: Forty-six study group participants (mean age 74.2 (SD 5.5) years) and 92 control group participants (mean age 74.4 (SD 5.4) years) were included. Fifty-four percent of the participants were female. The majority of the study group had severe COPD (median forced expiratory volume in one second of 34.5 (25th-75th percentile 27.0-56.0) % predicted). LLDI sores were lower for the study group compared to the control group for both the frequency (median difference -5.4 points, p<0.001) and limitation (median difference -7.6 points, p<0.001) domains. The personal subscale demonstrated the largest magnitude of difference between groups (median difference -13.4 points) and the social subscale demonstrated the smallest magnitude of difference (-5.2 points). CONCLUSION: People with COPD had greater participation restrictions than a random sample of older adults without ongoing respiratory conditions. The differences seen in participation between the two groups may have been reduced due to temporal confounding from the COVID-19 pandemic. While participation is relevant to all older adults, our results suggest that it is especially important that it be assessed in those with COPD.

Transforming challenges into opportunities: conducting health preference research during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.

The disruptions to health research during the COVID-19 pandemic are being recognized globally, and there is a growing need for understanding the pandemic's impact on the health and health preferences of patients, caregivers, and the general public. Ongoing and planned health preference research (HPR) has been affected due to problems associated with recruitment, data collection, and data interpretation. While there are no "one size fits all" solutions, this commentary summarizes the key challenges in HPR within the context of the pandemic and offers pragmatic solutions and directions for future research. We recommend recruitment of a diverse, typically under-represented population in HPR using online, quota-based crowdsourcing platforms, and community partnerships. We foresee emerging evidence on remote, and telephone-based HPR modes of administration, with further studies on the shifts in preferences related to health and healthcare services as a result of the pandemic. We believe that the recalibration of HPR, due to what one would hope is an impermanent change, will permanently change how we conduct HPR in the future.

The Performance of Digital Monitoring Devices for Oxygen Saturation and Respiratory Rate in COPD: A Systematic Review.

Healthcare access and delivery for individuals with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) who live in remote areas or who are susceptible to contracting communicable diseases, such as COVID-19, may be a challenge. Telehealth and remote monitoring devices can be used to overcome this issue. However, the accuracy of these devices must be ensured before forming healthcare decisions based on their outcomes. Therefore, a systematic review was performed to synthesize the evidence on the reliability, validity and responsiveness of digital devices used for tracking oxygen saturation (SpO2) and/or respiratory rate (RR) in individuals with COPD, in remote settings. Three electronic databases were searched: MEDLINE (1996 to October 8, 2020), EMBASE (1996 to October 8, 2020) and CINAHL (1998 to October 8, 2020). Studies were included if they aimed to evaluate one or more measurement properties of a digital device measuring SpO2 or RR in individuals with COPD. Six-hundred and twenty-five articles were identified and after screening, 7 studies matched the inclusion criteria; covering 11 devices measuring SpO2 and/or RR. Studies reported on the reliability (n = 1), convergent validity (n = 1), concurrent validity (n = 2) and predictive validity (n = 2) of SpO2 devices and on the convergent validity (n = 1), concurrent validity (n = 1) and predictive validity (n = 1) of RR devices. SpO2 and RR devices were valid when compared against other respiration monitoring devices but were not precise in predicting exacerbation events. More well-designed measurement studies are needed to make firm conclusions about the accuracy of such devices.Supplemental data for this article is available online at https://doi.org/10.1080/15412555.2021.1945021 .