Age-related differences in dual task walking: a cross sectional study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Variability in stride velocity during walking characterizes gait instability and predicts falling in older individuals. Walking while executing a cognitive task is also associated with increased risk of falling, particularly in older adults. Variability in stride velocity, particularly during dual task walking conditions, may differ between younger and older individuals. The purpose of this study was to examine whether gait velocity and variability in stride velocity differ between older community-dwelling women and younger women during dual task walking.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Twenty-three older (80 ± 9 years) and 19 younger (23 ± 2 years) women walked under each of two conditions: (1) walking at a self-selected velocity and (2) walking at a self-selected velocity while incrementally counting backwards. Gait velocity and variability in stride velocity were measured with GAITRite^®instrumentation.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Gait velocity decreased and variability in stride variability increased, in both groups, during dual task walking. The relative reduction in gait velocity and the magnitude of variability in stride velocity were greater in the older subjects than younger subjects.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The gait changes observed in dual task walking characterize reduced gait stability and indicate that cognitively demanding tasks during walking have a destabilizing effect on gait that may place older persons at greater risk of falls.</p

SCANGREEN 2019-2022: Turfgrass species, varieties and seed mixtures for Scandinavian putting greens. Final results from a four-year testing period.

The objective of SCANGREEN 2019-22 was to find species, varieties and seed blends/mixtures of Agrostis, Festuca, Poa and Lolium that are suited for pesticide-free management of putting greens in the two major climatic zones of the Nordic countries and in the northern USA. The four test sites in the Nordic countries were Reykjavik GC, Iceland and NIBIO Apelsvoll in the the northern zone, and NIBIO Landvik, Norway and Smørum GC, Denmark in the southern zone. The two US test sites were located at Troll Turfgrass Research Facility in Massachusetts and at University of Minnesota. The trials included 30 candidate varieties representing eight different species and subspecies from 13 different seed companies/representatives, and three seed mixtures of red fescue and colonial and creeping bentgrass, a seed mixture of creeping bentgrass and perennial ryegrass and a seed blend of red fescue. Monthly evaluations of overall impression, tiller density, winter hardiness, disease and weed coverage etc., were done from three weeks after sowing in June-September 2019 until October 2022. The trial at Smørum GC was established in May 2021. The trials were established according to a split-plot design with three blocks (replicates), species on main plots and varieties on subplots. The experimental greens were mown three times per week – Monday, Wednesday, and Friday and deficit-irrigated to 80% of field capacity three to four times per week in periods without sufficient natural rainfall. Fertilizer (mean N–P–K ratio, 100–22–74) was given as completely balanced compound fertilizers every second week. Each experimental green was divided in different management levels: High and low fertilizer rate and high and low mowing. The two fertilizer rates were 10 and 17 g N m−2 yr−1 and the two mowing heights were 3 and 5 mm. Mixtures were managed at both regimes. There was no use of pesticides or plant growth regulators in any of the trials.SCANGREEN 2019-2022: Turfgrass species, varieties and seed mixtures for Scandinavian putting greens. Final results from a four-year testing period.publishedVersio

Cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney disease, and diabetes mortality burden of cardiometabolic risk factors from 1980 to 2010: A comparative risk assessment

Background: High blood pressure, blood glucose, serum cholesterol, and BMI are risk factors for cardiovascular diseases and some of these factors also increase the risk of chronic kidney disease and diabetes. We estimated mortality from cardiovascular diseases, chronic kidney disease, and diabetes that was attributable to these four cardiometabolic risk factors for all countries and regions from 1980 to 2010. Methods: We used data for exposure to risk factors by country, age group, and sex from pooled analyses of population-based health surveys. We obtained relative risks for the effects of risk factors on cause-specific mortality from meta-analyses of large prospective studies. We calculated the population attributable fractions for each risk factor alone, and for the combination of all risk factors, accounting for multicausality and for mediation of the effects of BMI by the other three risks. We calculated attributable deaths by multiplying the cause-specific population attributable fractions by the number of disease-specific deaths. We obtained cause-specific mortality from the Global Burden of Diseases, Injuries, and Risk Factors 2010 Study. We propagated the uncertainties of all the inputs to the final estimates. Findings: In 2010, high blood pressure was the leading risk factor for deaths due to cardiovascular diseases, chronic kidney disease, and diabetes in every region, causing more than 40% of worldwide deaths from these diseases; high BMI and glucose were each responsible for about 15% of deaths, and high cholesterol for more than 10%. After accounting for multicausality, 63% (10·8 million deaths, 95% CI 10·1-11·5) of deaths from these diseases in 2010 were attributable to the combined effect of these four metabolic risk factors, compared with 67% (7·1 million deaths, 6·6-7·6) in 1980. The mortality burden of high BMI and glucose nearly doubled from 1980 to 2010. At the country level, age-standardised death rates from these diseases attributable to the combined effects of these four risk factors surpassed 925 deaths per 100 000 for men in Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Mongolia, but were less than 130 deaths per 100 000 for women and less than 200 for men in some high-income countries including Australia, Canada, France, Japan, the Netherlands, Singapore, South Korea, and Spain. Interpretation: The salient features of the cardiometabolic disease and risk factor epidemic at the beginning of the 21st century are high blood pressure and an increasing effect of obesity and diabetes. The mortality burden of cardiometabolic risk factors has shifted from high-income to low-income and middle-income countries. Lowering cardiometabolic risks through dietary, behavioural, and pharmacological interventions should be a part of the global response to non-communicable diseases. Funding: UK Medical Research Council, US National Institutes of Health. © 2014 Elsevier Ltd

2012 University of Minnesota Turfgrass Cultivar Evaluation Results

Each year, the turfgrass research team at the University of Minnesota evaluates thousands of plots for turf performance. Typically, these evaluations are done visually, with a turfgrass researcher giving a score to each plot. The primary rating is “turfgrass quality”, which is rated on a scale of 1-9, with a 9 representing the best turfgrass quality and a 1 representing the poorest turfgrass quality. Turfgrass quality is a combination of traits that make a turf aesthetically pleasing, including color, density, freedom from disease and weeds, and uniformity. The results are separated by trial and planting year, and a table with all applications of fertilizers and pesticides along with other management information is also included

2011 University of Minnesota Turfgrass Cultivar Evaluation Results

Each year, the turfgrass research team at the University of Minnesota evaluates thousands of plots for turf performance. Typically, these evaluations are done visually, with a turfgrass researcher giving a score to each plot. The primary rating is “turfgrass quality”, which is rated on a scale of 1-9, with a 9 representing the best turfgrass quality and a 1 representing the poorest turfgrass quality. Turfgrass quality is a combination of traits that make a turf aesthetically pleasing, including color, density, freedom from disease and weeds, and uniformity. The results are separated by trial and planting year, and a table with all applications of fertilizers and pesticides along with other management information is also included

2016 University of Minnesota Turfgrass Cultivar Evaluation Results

Each year, the turfgrass research team at the University of Minnesota evaluates thousands of plots for turf performance. Typically, these evaluations are done visually, with a turfgrass researcher giving a score to each plot. The primary rating is “turfgrass quality”, which is rated on a scale of 1-9, with a 9 representing the best turfgrass quality and a 1 representing the poorest turfgrass quality. Turfgrass quality is a combination of traits that make a turf aesthetically pleasing, including color, density, freedom from disease and weeds, and uniformity. The results are separated by trial and planting year, and a table with all applications of fertilizers and pesticides along with other management information is also included

2010 University of Minnesota Turfgrass Cultivar Evaluation Results

Each year, the turfgrass research team at the University of Minnesota evaluates thousands of plots for turf performance. Typically, these evaluations are done visually, with a turfgrass researcher giving a score to each plot. The primary rating is “turfgrass quality”, which is rated on a scale of 1-9, with a 9 representing the best turfgrass quality and a 1 representing the poorest turfgrass quality. Turfgrass quality is a combination of traits that make a turf aesthetically pleasing, including color, density, freedom from disease and weeds, and uniformity. The results are separated by trial and planting year, and a table with all applications of fertilizers and pesticides along with other management information is also included

2013 University of Minnesota Turfgrass Cultivar Evaluation Results

Each year, the turfgrass research team at the University of Minnesota evaluates thousands of plots for turf performance. Typically, these evaluations are done visually, with a turfgrass researcher giving a score to each plot. The primary rating is “turfgrass quality”, which is rated on a scale of 1-9, with a 9 representing the best turfgrass quality and a 1 representing the poorest turfgrass quality. Turfgrass quality is a combination of traits that make a turf aesthetically pleasing, including color, density, freedom from disease and weeds, and uniformity. The results are separated by trial and planting year, and a table with all applications of fertilizers and pesticides along with other management information is also included