Advertisement

The journal of nutrition, health & aging

, Volume 21, Issue 9, pp 1002–1009 | Cite as

Measuring Active and Healthy Ageing: Applying a generic interdisciplinary assessment model incorporating ICF

  • Petra Stute
  • N. Bitterlich
  • J. Bousquet
  • F. Meissner
  • M. von Wolff
  • D. Poethig
Article

Abstract

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.

Keywords

European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing EIP-AHA bio-functional status bio-functional age health resources Bern Cohort Study 2014 International Classification of Functioning Disability and Health (ICF) 

Supplementary material

12603_2017_908_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (1.6 mb)
Supplementary material, approximately 1.63 MB.

References

  1. 1.
    Bousquet J, Michel J, Standberg T, Crooks G, Iakovidis I, Gomez M. The European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing: The European Geriatric Medicine introduces the EIP on AHA Column. Eur Geriatr Med 2014;5(6): 361–362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bousquet J, Malva J, Nogues M, Manas LR, Vellas B, Farrell J, Group MR. Operational Definition of Active and Healthy Aging (AHA): The European Innovation Partnership (EIP) on AHA Reference Site Questionnaire: Montpellier October 20-21, 2014, Lisbon July 2, 2015. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association. 2015;doi:10.1016/j.jamda.2015.09.004Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bousquet J, Kuh D, Bewick M, Standberg T, Farrell J, Pengelly R, Joel ME, Rodriguez Manas L, Mercier J, Bringer J, Camuzat T, Bourret R, Bedbrook A, Kowalski ML, Samolinski B, Bonini S, Brayne C, Michel JP, Venne J, Viriot- Durandal P, Alonso J, Avignon A, Ben-Shlomo Y, Bousquet PJ, Combe B, Cooper R, Hardy R, Iaccarino G, Keil T, Kesse-Guyot E, Momas I, Ritchie K, Robine JM, Thijs C, Tischer C, Vellas B, Zaidi A, Alonso F, Andersen Ranberg K, Andreeva V, Ankri J, Arnavielhe S, Arshad H, Auge P, Berr C, Bertone P, Blain H, Blasimme A, Buijs GJ, Caimmi D, Carriazo A, Cesario A, Coletta J, Cosco T, Criton M, Cuisinier F, Demoly P, Fernandez-Nocelo S, Fougere B, Garcia-Aymerich J, Goldberg M, Guldemond N, Gutter Z, Harman D, Hendry A, Heve D, Illario M, Jeandel C, Krauss-Etschmann S, Krys O, Kula D, Laune D, Lehmann S, Maier D, Malva J, Matignon P, Melen E, Mercier G, Moda G, Nizinkska A, Nogues M, O’Neill M, Pelissier JY, Poethig D, Porta D, Postma D, Puisieux F, Richards M, Robalo-Cordeiro C, Romano V, Roubille F, Schulz H, Scott A, Senesse P, Slagter S, Smit HA, Somekh D, Stafford M, Suanzes J, Todo-Bom A, Touchon J, Traver-Salcedo V, Van Beurden M, Varraso R, Vergara I, Villalba-Mora E, Wilson N, Wouters E, Zins M. Operational Definition of Active and Healthy Ageing (AHA): A Conceptual Framework. J Nutr Health Aging 2015;19(9): 955–960. doi:10.1007/s12603-015-0589-6CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bousquet J, Bourquin C, Augé P, Domy P, Bringer J, Camuzat T. MACVIA-LR Reference Site of the European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing. Eur Geriatr Med 2014;5(6): 406–415CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bousquet J, Kuh D, Bewick M, Strandberg T, Farrell J, Pengelly R. Operational definition of active and healthy ageing (AHA): Report of the meeting held in Montpellier October 2015;21,22–2012. Eur Geriatr Med 7:in pressGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kuh D, Cooper R, Hardy R, Richards M, Ben-Shlomo YAlcathao. A life course approach to healthy ageing. Oxford, 2014Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Organization WH. Healthy ageing requires a life-course approach. doi:http://www.euro.who.int/en/health-topics/Life-stages/healthy-ageing/news/news/2015/09/healthyageing-requires-a-life-course-approach, 2015Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    von Bertalanffy K. An outline of General System Theory. Br J Philos Sci 1950;1:134–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Buerger M. Biomorphosis-The life change theory of human organism and its functions (dt.). Ärztl Fortbild 1956;5:409–423Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Beier W. The human life course from a theoretical point (dt.). Z Ges Inn Med 1976;31:90–93PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Strehler B. Time, cells and aging. Academic Press, London, 1977Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Beier W, Poethig D. Tradition with important potential for the future -About Measuring Vitality, Age and Aging (dt.). Bewegungstherapie und Gesundheitssport 2013;29:6–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hochschild R. Can an index of aging be constructed for evaluating treatments to retard aging rates? A 2,462-person study. Journal of gerontology 1990;45 (6):B187-214CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lehtisalo J., Lindström J., Ngandu T., Kivipelto M., Ahtiluoto S., Ilanne-Parikka P., Keinänen-Kiukaanniemi S., Eriksson J.G., Uusitupa M., Tuomilehto J.J.L, Study FDP. Association of Long-Term Dietary Fat Intake, Exercise, and Weight with Later Cognitive Function in the Finnish Diabetes Prevention Study. J Nutr Health Aging 2016;20(2): 146–154. doi:10.1007/s12603-015-0565-1CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hau C., Reid K. F., Wong K. F., Chin R. J., Botto T. J., Eliasziw M., Bermudez O. I.R.A. F. Collaborative Evaluation of the Healthy Habits Program: An Effective Community Intervention to Improve Mobility and Cognition of Chinese Older Adults Living in the U.S. J Nutr Health Aging 2016;20(4): 391–397. doi:10.1007/s12603-015-0623-8CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Poethig D. Experimental development of a clinical diagnostic model objectifying bio-functional age(ing) of human being. Habilitation thesis (dt.). German National Library Leipzig, http://d-nb.info/850613108. 1984Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ries W, Poethig D (1984) Chronological and biological age -A new method to measure healthy aging. Exp Gerontol 1984.19 (3):211–216CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dean W. Biological aging measurement: Clinical applications. The German test battery, University Leipzig, 175-87. The Center for Bio Gerontology Los Angeles. 1988Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Grotkamp S, Cibis W, Nuechtern E, von Mittelstaedt G, Seger W. Personal Factors in the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: Prospective Evidence. Australian Journal of Rehabilitation Counselling 2012.18 (1):1-24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Viol M. Bio-psychosocial aging -Positioning of the vitality concept in the ICF (dt.). Bewegungstherapie und Gesundheitssport 2011.27:74-79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hamilton M. A rating scale for depression. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry 1960.23:56-62Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bullinger M, Kirchberger I, Ware J. Der deutsche SF-36 Health Survey. Übersetzung und psychometrische Testung eines krankheitsübergreifenden Instrumentes zur Erfassung der gesundheitsbezogenen Lebensqualität. Zeitschrift fuer Gesundheitswissenschaften 1995;1:21-36Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Schulz P, Schlotz W, Becker P. Trierer Inventar zum chronischen Stress (TICS). Hogrefe, Göttingen. 2004Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ardelt-Gattinger E, Meindl M. AD-EVA. Interdisziplinäres Testsystem zur Diagnostik und Evaluation bei Adipositas und anderen durch Ess-und Bewegungsverhalten beeinflussbaren Krankheiten. Huber, Bern. 2010Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Zenz H, Bischoff C, Hrabal V. Patiententheorienfragebogen (PATEF). Handanweisung. Hogrefe, Göttingen. 1996Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Molnar M, Haiden C., Geißler-Gruber B. IMPULS-Broschüre und IMPULS-Test. Betriebliche Analyse der Arbeitsbedingungen. AUVA, AK, ÖGB, WKÖ (Hg.) Wien. 2012Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Heart rate variability: standards of measurement, physiological interpretation and clinical use. Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology and the North American Society of Pacing and Electrophysiology; Circulation 1996;93(5): 1043–1065Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Kalbe E, Baller G, Brand M, Kessler J; Das Inventar zur Gedächtnisdiagnostik: Vorstellung der endgültigen Version. vol 33 Akt Neurol 2006;. doi:10.1055/s-2006-953127Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Meissner-Poethig D, Michalak U. Vitalitaet und aerztliche Intervention. Vitalitaetsdiagnostik: Grundlagen-Angebote-Konsequenzen. Hippokrates-Verlag, 1997Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Beckmann D, Brähler E, Richter H-E. Der Gießen-Test (GT), vol 4. erweiterte und überarbeitete Auflage mit Neustandardisierung 1990. Huber, Bern. 1991Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    http://www.bfs.admin.ch.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    http://www.bib-demografie.de/EN/Facts_Figures/Mortality/Figures/a_08_25b_ lebenserwartung_geburt_erreichbares_alter65_o_geschlecht_ab1958. html?nn=3214682.2015. Accessed 10.11.2015Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Pfeifer K, Huber G, Baldus A, Poethig D, Schule K. [Resource management: ICF-oriented exercise programs for patients with diabetes mellitus type 2. Chronic illnesses and biopsychosocial status]. Zeitschrift fur Gerontologie und Geriatrie 2012;45(2): 119–127. doi:10.1007/s00391-011-0276-0CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Europe WHOROf. Strategy and action plan for healthy aging in Europe, 2012-2020. Paper presented at the Regional committee for Europe, sixty-second session, MaltaGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Poethig D, Gerdes W, Viol M, Wagner P, Simm A. [Biofunctional age diagnosis in humans. Potentials and limits]. Zeitschrift fur Gerontologie und Geriatrie 2011;44(3): 198–204. doi:10.1007/s00391-011-0171-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Stute P, Meissner F, Sudeck G. Natural health resource use, vitality analysis and vitalisation in practice: The Bern Model. B&G–Bewegungstherapie und Gesundheitssport 2011;27(2): 80–85. doi:10.1055/s-0031-1271376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    GmbH DI. Das B.I.A.-Kompendium 3. Ausgabe, 2005.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Schumacher J, Wilz G, Gunzelmann T, Brahler E. [The Antonovsky Sense of Coherence Scale. Test statistical evaluation of a representative population sample and construction of a brief scale]. Psychotherapie, Psychosomatik, medizinische Psychologie 2000;50(12): 472–482. doi:10.1055/s-2000-9207PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Poethig D, Ries W. Sex differences of biological aging -Experimental study outcomes. Z Alternsforsch 1985;40(4): 235–244Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Serdi and Springer-Verlag France 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Petra Stute
    • 1
    • 6
  • N. Bitterlich
    • 2
  • J. Bousquet
    • 3
  • F. Meissner
    • 4
  • M. von Wolff
    • 1
  • D. Poethig
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics and GynecologyUniversity of BernBernSwitzerland
  2. 2.Medizin & Service GmbHChemnitzGermany
  3. 3.MACVIA-France (Contre les Maladies Chroniques pour un VIeillissement Actif en France)ParisFrance
  4. 4.vital.services GmbHGerontoLabEuropeLeipzigGermany
  5. 5.European Association on Vitality and Active Aging eVAA e.V.LeipzigGermany
  6. 6.Department of Gynecologic Endocrinology and Reproductive MedicineUniversity Clinic of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Inselspital BernBernSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations