Dementia Patients Are More Sedentary and Less Physically Active than Age- and Sex-Matched Cognitively Healthy Older Adults.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to examine physical activity and sedentary behaviour characteristics of ambulatory and community-dwelling patients with dementia compared to cognitively healthy age-, sex- and weight-matched controls. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we included community-dwelling dementia patients (n = 45, age 79.6 ± 5.9 years, Mini-Mental State Examination [MMSE] 22.8 ± 3.2) and matched controls (n = 49, age 80.0 ± 7.7 years, MMSE 29.0 ± 1.2). Participants wore a wrist accelerometer for 7 days to assess sedentary time, sedentary bout duration and time spent in very light, light-to-moderate and moderate-to-vigorous physical activities. RESULTS: Relative sedentary time and sedentary bout duration was significantly higher in dementia patients than in controls (median [interquartile range] 57% [49-68] vs. 55% [47-59] and 18.3 [16.4-21.1] min vs. 16.6 [15.3-18.4] min, p = 0.042 and p = 0.008, respectively). In addition, dementia patients spent a lower percentage of their waking time in light-to-moderate and moderate-to-vigorous intensity physical activities (20% [15-23] vs. 22% [18-25] and 5% [2-10] vs. 10% [5-13], p = 0.017 and p = 0.001, respectively). CONCLUSION: We revealed that dementia patients are more sedentary and perform less physical activity than cognitively healthy controls. This may have clinically important consequences, given the observation that sedentary behaviour and little physical activity independently predict all-cause mortality and morbidity

Functional parameters indicative of mild cognitive impairment: a systematic review using instrumented kinematic assessment

Background: Patients with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) experience alterations of functional parameters, such as an impaired balance or gait. The current systematic review set out to investigate whether functional objective performance may predict a future risk of MCI; to compare functional objective parameters in patients with MCI and a control group; and to assess changes in these parameters after different physical activity interventions. Methods: Electronic databases, including PubMed, AMED, CINAHL, EMBASE, PEDro and Web of Science as well as grey literature databases, were searched from inception to February 2020. Cohort studies and Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) were included. The risk of bias of the included studies was assessed independently by reviewers using quality assessment checklists. The level of evidence per outcome was assessed using the GRADE criteria. Results: Seventeen studies met inclusion criteria including patients with MCI. Results from RCTs suggested that gait speed, gait variability and balance may be improved by different physical activity interventions. Cohort studies showed that slower gait speed, above all, under Dual Task (DT) conditions, was the main impaired parameter in patients with MCI in comparison with a Control Gorup. Furthermore, cohort studies suggested that gait variability could predict an incident MCI. Although most of included cohort studies reported low risk of bias, RCTs showed an unclear risk of bias. Conclusions: Studies suggest that gait variability may predict an incident MCI. Moreover, different gait parameters, above all under DT conditions, could be impaired in patients with MCI. These parameters could be improved by some physical activity interventions. Although cohort studies reported low risk of bias, RCTs showed an unclear risk of bias and GRADE criteria showed a low level of evidence per outcome, so further studies are required to refute our findings