3 research outputs found

    āļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļēāļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļŠāļąāļĄāļžāļąāļ™āļ˜āđŒāļĢāļ°āļŦāļ§āđˆāļēāļ‡āļĢāļ°āļ”āļąāļšāļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļēāđāļĨāļ°āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļŠāļēāļĄāļēāļĢāļ–āđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāđ€āļ”āļīāļ™ āļ‚āļ“āļ°āļĢāļšāļāļ§āļ™āļāļĢāļ°āļšāļ§āļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ„āļīāļ”āđƒāļ™āļœāļđāđ‰āļŠāļđāļ‡āļ­āļēāļĒāļļ Associations between Education Levels and Gait Performance during the Cognitive Dual Tasking in Older Adults

    Get PDF
    āļ§āļąāļ•āļ–āļļāļ›āļĢāļ°āļŠāļ‡āļ„āđŒ: āđ€āļžāļ·āđˆāļ­āļĻāļķāļāļĐāļēāļ–āļķāļ‡āļœāļĨāļāļĢāļ°āļ—āļšāļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļĢāļ°āļ”āļąāļšāļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļēāļ•āđˆāļ­āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļŠāļēāļĄāļēāļĢāļ–āđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāđ€āļ”āļīāļ™āđāļĨāļ°āļ•āđˆāļ­āļāļĢāļ°āļšāļ§āļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ„āļīāļ”āļ—āļĩāđˆāđ€āļāļĩāđˆāļĒāļ§āļāļąāļšāļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļˆāļģāļ—āļģāļ‡āļēāļ™āđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ—āļģāļāļīāļˆāļāļĢāļĢāļĄ 2 āļ­āļĒāđˆāļēāļ‡āļžāļĢāđ‰āļ­āļĄāļāļąāļ™āđƒāļ™āļœāļđāđ‰āļŠāļđāļ‡āļ­āļēāļĒāļļ āļ§āļīāļ˜āļĩāļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļē: āļœāļđāđ‰āļŠāļđāļ‡āļ­āļēāļĒāļļāļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļ—āļĩāđˆāļĄāļĩāļĢāļ°āļ”āļąāļšāļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļēāļ•āđˆāļģ āļˆāļģāļ™āļ§āļ™ 20 āļ„āļ™ āđāļĨāļ°āļĢāļ°āļ”āļąāļšāļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļēāļŠāļđāļ‡ āļˆāļģāļ™āļ§āļ™ 20 āļ„āļ™ āđ€āļ‚āđ‰āļēāļĢāđˆāļ§āļĄāļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļēāļ™āļĩāđ‰ āđ‚āļ”āļĒāļ—āļąāđ‰āļ‡āļŠāļ­āļ‡āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļĄāļĩāļ­āļēāļĒāļļāđ€āļ‰āļĨāļĩāđˆāļĒāđƒāļāļĨāđ‰āđ€āļ„āļĩāļĒāļ‡āļāļąāļ™ (āļ­āļēāļĒāļļāđ€āļ‰āļĨāļĩāđˆāļĒ 68.25 Âą 3.46 āļ›āļĩ āđƒāļ™āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļĢāļ°āļ”āļąāļšāļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļēāļ•āđˆāļģ āđāļĨāļ°āļ­āļēāļĒāļļāđ€āļ‰āļĨāļĩāđˆāļĒ 67.85 Âą 5.51āļ›āļĩ āđƒāļ™āļāļĨāļļāđˆāļĄāļĢāļ°āļ”āļąāļšāļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļēāļŠāļđāļ‡ āļāļēāļĢāļ›āļĢāļ°āđ€āļĄāļīāļ™āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļŠāļēāļĄāļēāļĢāļ–āđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāđ€āļ”āļīāļ™āļˆāļ°āļ›āļĢāļ°āđ€āļĄāļīāļ™āļ‚āļ“āļ°āđ€āļ”āļīāļ™āđ€āļ›āđ‡āļ™āļĢāļ°āļĒāļ°āļ—āļēāļ‡ 10 āđ€āļĄāļ•āļĢ āđāļĨāļ°āļ›āļĢāļ°āđ€āļĄāļīāļ™āļ‚āļ“āļ°āđ€āļ”āļīāļ™āļĢāļ°āļĒāļ°āļ—āļēāļ‡ 10 āđ€āļĄāļ•āļĢāļĢāđˆāļ§āļĄāļāļąāļšāļāļēāļĢāļ—āļģāļāļīāļˆāļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļ—āļēāļ‡āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļ„āļīāļ” āļāļīāļˆāļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļ—āļēāļ‡āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļ„āļīāļ” āļ›āļĢāļ°āļāļ­āļšāļ”āđ‰āļ§āļĒāļāļīāļˆāļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļĨāļšāđ€āļĨāļ‚āļ—āļĩāļĨāļ° 3 āļāļīāļˆāļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļšāļ­āļāļ•āļąāļ§āđ€āļĨāļ‚āļ•āļēāļĄāļ—āļĩāđˆāđ„āļ”āđ‰āļĒāļīāļ™ āđāļĨāļ°āļāļīāļˆāļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļšāļ­āļāļŠāļ·āđˆāļ­āļ„āļģāļ—āļĩāđˆāļ‚āļķāđ‰āļ™āļ•āđ‰āļ™āļ”āđ‰āļ§āļĒāļ•āļąāļ§āļ­āļąāļāļĐāļĢāļ—āļĩāđˆāļāļģāļŦāļ™āļ” āđ‚āļ”āļĒāļˆāļ°āļĄāļĩāļāļēāļĢāļŠāļļāđˆāļĄāļĨāļģāļ”āļąāļšāļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļāļīāļˆāļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļ—āļēāļ‡āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļ„āļīāļ”āļ‚āļ“āļ°āđ€āļ”āļīāļ™ āļœāļĨāļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļē: āļĢāļ°āļ”āļąāļšāļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļēāļĄāļĩāļœāļĨāļ­āļĒāđˆāļēāļ‡āļĄāļĩāļ™āļąāļĒāļŠāļģāļ„āļąāļāļ•āđˆāļ­āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāđ€āļĢāđ‡āļ§āđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāđ€āļ”āļīāļ™ (F(1,152) = 13.66, p < 0.001) āļŠāđˆāļ§āļ‡āđ€āļ§āļĨāļēāđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļāđ‰āļēāļ§ (F(1,152) = 11.53, p < 0.01) āļĢāļ°āļĒāļ°āļāđ‰āļēāļ§āļ‚āļē (F(1,152) = 15.81, p < 0.001) āđāļĨāļ°āļˆāļģāļ™āļ§āļ™āļāđ‰āļēāļ§āļ•āđˆāļ­āļ™āļēāļ—āļĩ (F(1,152) = 14.57, p < 0.01) āļ­āļĒāđˆāļēāļ‡āđ„āļĢāļāđ‡āļ•āļēāļĄāļĢāļ°āļ”āļąāļšāļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļēāđ„āļĄāđˆāļĄāļĩāļœāļĨāļ•āđˆāļ­āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāđāļ›āļĢāļ›āļĢāļ§āļ™āđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāđ€āļ”āļīāļ™ āđāļĨāļ°āļœāļĨāļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļāļēāļĢāļ—āļģāļāļīāļˆāļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļŠāļ­āļ‡āļ­āļĒāđˆāļēāļ‡āļžāļĢāđ‰āļ­āļĄāļāļąāļ™āļ”āđ‰āļēāļ™āļāļĢāļ°āļšāļ§āļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ„āļīāļ” āļŠāļĢāļļāļ› āļĢāļ°āļ”āļąāļšāļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļēāļĄāļĩāļœāļĨāļ•āđˆāļ­āļāļēāļĢāđ€āļ”āļīāļ™āđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ•āļĢāļ§āļˆāļ›āļĢāļ°āđ€āļĄāļīāļ™āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļŠāļēāļĄāļēāļĢāļ–āđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ—āļĢāļ‡āļ•āļąāļ§āļ‚āļ“āļ°āđ€āļ”āļīāļ™āļ”āđ‰āļ§āļĒāļ§āļīāļ˜āļĩāļĢāļšāļāļ§āļ™āļāļĢāļ°āļšāļ§āļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ„āļīāļ”āđāļĨāļ°āļāļēāļĢāđ€āļ„āļĨāļ·āđˆāļ­āļ™āđ„āļŦāļ§āđƒāļ™āļœāļđāđ‰āļŠāļđāļ‡āļ­āļēāļĒāļļ āđ‚āļ”āļĒāđƒāļ™āļœāļđāđ‰āļĄāļĩāļĢāļ°āļ”āļąāļšāļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļēāļŠāļđāļ‡āđ€āļ”āļīāļ™āđ„āļ”āđ‰āđ€āļĢāđ‡āļ§āļāļ§āđˆāļē āļ­āļĒāđˆāļēāļ‡āđ„āļĢāļāđ‡āļ•āļēāļĄāļĢāļ°āļ”āļąāļšāļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļēāđ„āļĄāđˆāļĄāļĩāļœāļĨāļ•āđˆāļ­āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāđāļ›āļĢāļ›āļĢāļ§āļ™āđƒāļ™āļāļēāļĢāđ€āļ”āļīāļ™āđāļĨāļ°āļœāļĨāļ‚āļ­āļ‡āļāļēāļĢāļ—āļģāļāļīāļˆāļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļŠāļ­āļ‡āļ­āļĒāđˆāļēāļ‡āļžāļĢāđ‰āļ­āļĄāļāļąāļ™āđƒāļ™āļāļĢāļ°āļšāļ§āļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ„āļīāļ”āļ—āļĩāđˆāđ€āļāļĩāđˆāļĒāļ§āļ‚āđ‰āļ­āļ‡āļāļąāļšāļāļīāļˆāļāļĢāļĢāļĄāļ—āļēāļ‡āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļ„āļīāļ”āļ„āļ§āļēāļĄāļˆāļģāļ—āļģāļ‡āļēāļ™ āļ„āļģāļŠāļģāļ„āļąāļ: āļāļĢāļ°āļšāļ§āļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ„āļīāļ”, āļāļēāļĢāļĢāļšāļāļ§āļ™āļāļĢāļ°āļšāļ§āļ™āļāļēāļĢāļ„āļīāļ”, āļĢāļ°āļ”āļąāļšāļāļēāļĢāļĻāļķāļāļĐāļē, āļāļēāļĢāđ€āļ”āļīāļ™ Abstract Objective: To examine whether there are education differences in dual-task performances with working memory tasks in older adults. Methods: Twenty older adults with a low level of education and 20 older adults with a high level of education participated in the present study. Both groups have a similar age range (low level of education aged 68.25 Âą 3.46, high level of education aged 67.85 Âą 5.51). Gait was assessed under single task (10-meter walk without a cognitive task) and dual-task (walk with a cognitive task). Three cognitive tasks that were simultaneously performed during walk were subtraction, auditory working memory, and phonologic fluency that randomized in order. Results: Main effects of education were found for gait speed (F(1,152) = 13.66, p < 0.001), stride time (F(1,152) = 11.53, p < 0.01), stride length (F(1,152) = 15.81, p < 0.001), and cadence (F(1,152) = 14.57, p < 0.01). Education levels had no significant main effects on gait variability and cognitive dual-task effect (DTE). Conclusion: Education levels significantly affected gait performances in older adults. The older adults with a high education level demonstrated better performances during walking simultaneously with cognitive tasks. However, no effects of education were found on gait variability and cognitive DTE. Keywords: cognitive, dual-task interference, education level, gai

    Walking devices used by community-dwelling elderly: Proportion, types, and associated factors

    No full text
    Background: Advancing age is likely to increase the requirement for walking devices. However, the existing evidence mostly involves all types of external devices used from participants in developed countries with or without medical problems. The findings may be different from the data on the use of walking devices exclusively, particularly for the elderly who live in a rural community of a developing country. Objective: This study explored the proportion, types, and factors associated with the use of walking devices in 343 elderly aged â‰Ĩ 65 years who live in a rural area of Thailand. Methods: The participants were interviewed and assessed for their walking device used and functional mobility. Results: The data demonstrated that 74 participants (22%) used a walking device for mobility. Most of them used a modified walking stick (70%), followed by a standard single cane (27%), and a walker (3%). Although most of these participants used a walking device due to their own determination with only a few of them using it according to medical prescription, their functional ability was significantly poorer than those who walked without a walking device (p < 0.05). Being unable to walk faster than 1 m/s and having a caregiver had the strongest relationship with the use of a walking device. The findings may be related to the study's locations. Being in a rural community of a developing country with a low level of education, participants may encounter some difficulty in accessing proper medical services. Therefore they used a device that could possibly help them to execute daily activities independently. Conclusion: Our findings may provide an insight into planning programmes for health monitoring and promotion, and medical services for community-dwelling elderly who live in a similar context
    corecore