Frailty, Physical Activity, and Mobility in Patients With Cardiac Implantable Electrical Devices
MetadataShow full item record
CitationKramer, Daniel B., Timothy Tsai, Poorna Natarajan, Elise Tewksbury, Susan L. Mitchell, and Thomas G. Travison. 2017. “Frailty, Physical Activity, and Mobility in Patients With Cardiac Implantable Electrical Devices.” Journal of the American Heart Association: Cardiovascular and Cerebrovascular Disease 6 (2): e004659. doi:10.1161/JAHA.116.004659. http://dx.doi.org/10.1161/JAHA.116.004659.
AbstractBackground: This study aimed to demonstrate the feasibility of measuring frailty in patients with cardiac implantable electrical devices while validating the physiologic significance of device‐detected physical activity by evaluating its association with frailty and mobility. Methods and Results: Outpatients with cardiac implantable electrical devices compatible with physical activity analysis with at least 7 days of data were eligible. Office testing included frailty status (Study of Osteoporotic Fractures instrument), gait speed (m/s), mobility according to the Timed Up and Go (TUG) test (seconds), and daily physical activity (h/d) as measured by cardiac implantable electrical device. Among 219 patients, Study of Osteoporotic Fractures testing found 39.7% to be robust, 47.5% prefrail, and 12.8% frail. The mean gait speed for the cohort was 0.8±0.3 m/s, mean TUG time was 10.9±4.4 seconds, and mean activity was 2.8±1.9 h/d. Frail patients were markedly more likely to have gait speeds <0.8 m/s (OR 6.25, 95% CI 1.79‐33.3). In unadjusted analyses each 1‐hour increase in mean daily activity was associated with a 46% reduction of frail phenotype (OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.40‐0.74) versus robust and with a 27% reduction in the odds of having the prefrail phenotype (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.62‐0.86). After adjustment this association per hour of activity persisted, with an adjusted OR for frailty of 0.71 (95% CI 0.51‐0.99) and adjusted OR for prefrailty of 0.81 (95% CI 0.67‐0.99). Conclusions: Frailty and mobility limitation are common among cardiac implantable electrical device patients and are correlated to device‐detected physical activity.
Citable link to this pagehttp://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:34375037
- HMS Scholarly Articles