Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Role of cognitive resources on everyday functioning among oldest-old physically frail

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Aging Clinical and Experimental Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Everyday functioning becomes a challenge with aging, particularly among frail oldest-old adults. Several factors have been identified as influencing everyday activities realization, including physical and cognitive functioning. However, the influence of cognitive resources as a compensatory factor in the context of physical frailty deserves further consideration.

Aims

This study aims to investigate in older adults physically frail the possible compensatory role of cognitive resources to perform everyday tasks.

Methods

Two groups of community-dwelling old participants (n = 26 per group) matched for their age and cognitive resources, have been drawn according to their level of physical functioning. Two measures of everyday functioning have been assessed: one self-reported by the participant (the IADL scale) and one performance-based measure (the TIADL tasks).

Results

Participants performed equally the TIADL tasks irrespective of their physical condition. Contrariwise, participants with low physical functioning reported more everyday difficulties than their counterparts with a high level of physical functioning. Additionally, regressions analyses revealed differential influence of cognitive resources on performance and reported measures of everyday functioning.

Discussion

Our data suggests that cognitive resources are more strongly involved in the performance-based IADL measure in situation of physical frailty. Additionally, for participants with low physical functioning, lower cognitive resources are associated with more perceived difficulties in everyday life.

Conclusion

These results highlight the compensatory role of cognitive resources in physically frail older adults, and suggest that an overestimation of everyday difficulties compared to performance on IADL tasks is an early indicator of physical decline and cognitive compensation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

References

  1. Diehl M (1998) Everyday competence in later life: current status and future directions. Gerontologist 38:422–433. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/38.4.422

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Heyl V, Wahl H-W (2012) Managing daily life with age-related sensory loss: cognitive resources gain in importance. Psychol Aging 27:510–521. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025471

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Lawton MP, Brody EM (1969) Assessment of older people: self-maintaining and instrumental activities of daily living. Gerontologist 9:179–186

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Gold DA (2012) An examination of instrumental activities of daily living assessment in older adults and mild cognitive impairment. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 34:11–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803395.2011.614598

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Lawton MP, Moss M, Fulcomer M, Kleban MH (1982) A research and service oriented multilevel assessment instrument. J Gerontol 37:91–99. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronj/37.1.91

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Ware JE, Sherbourne CD (1992) The MOS 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): I. conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 30:473–483

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Fillenbaum GG (2013) Multidimensional functional assessment of older adults : The Duke older Americans resources and services procedures. Psychology Press

  8. Owsley C, Sloane M, McGwin G Jr, Ball K (2002) Timed instrumental activities of daily living tasks: relationship to cognitive function and everyday performance assessments in older adults. Gerontology 48:254–265. https://doi.org/10.1159/000058360

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Moore DJ, Palmer BW, Patterson TL, Jeste DV (2007) A review of performance-based measures of functional living skills. J Psychiatr Res 41:97–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2005.10.008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Suchy Y, Kraybill ML, Franchow E (2011) Instrumental activities of daily living among community-dwelling older adults: discrepancies between self-report and performance are mediated by cognitive reserve. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol 33:92–100. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803395.2010.493148

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Burton CL, Strauss E, Hultsch DF, Hunter MA (2006) Cognitive functioning and everyday problem solving in older adults. Clin Neuropsychol 20:432–452. https://doi.org/10.1080/13854040590967063

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Bravell ME, Zarit SH, Johansson B (2011) Self-reported activities of daily living and performance-based functional ability: a study of congruence among the oldest old. Eur J Ageing 8:199–209. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10433-011-0192-6

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Pruchno RA, Wilson-Genderson M (2015) A longitudinal examination of the effects of early influences and midlife characteristics on successful aging. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci 70:850–859. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbu046

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Mejía ST, Ryan LH, Gonzalez R, Smith J (2017) Successful aging as the intersection of individual resources, age, environment, and experiences of well-being in daily activities. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci 72:279–289. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbw148

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Hering A, Kliegel M, Rendell PG et al (2018) Prospective memory is a key predictor of functional independence in older adults. J Int Neuropsychol Soc JINS 24:640–645. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355617718000152

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Gross AL, Rebok GW, Unverzagt FW et al (2011) Cognitive predictors of everyday functioning in older adults: results from the ACTIVE Cognitive Intervention Trial. J Gerontol Ser B 66B:557–566. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbr033

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Wechsler D (2008) Wechsler adult intelligence scale - Fourth Edition (WAIS-IV). 498

  18. Dubois B, Slachevsky A, Litvan I, Pillon B (2000) The FAB: a frontal assessment battery at bedside. Neurology 55:1621. https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.55.11.1621

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Jurica PJ, Leitten CL, Mattis S (1988) DRS-2 dementia rating scale-2: professional manual. Psychological Assessment Resources

  20. Park H, Jang I-Y, Lee HY et al (2019) Screening value of social frailty and its association with physical frailty and disability in community-dwelling older Koreans: aging study of PyeongChang rural area. Int J Environ Res Public Health. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16162809

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Fried LP, Tangen CM, Walston J et al (2001) Frailty in older adults: evidence for a phenotype. J Gerontol Ser A 56:M146–M157. https://doi.org/10.1093/gerona/56.3.M146

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Shimada H, Makizako H, Doi T et al (2015) Incidence of disability in frail older persons with or without slow walking speed. J Am Med Dir Assoc 16:690–696. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamda.2015.03.019

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Makino K, Ihira H, Mizumoto A et al (2018) Structural analysis of impact of physical, cognitive and social status on the incidence of disability in community-dwelling people aged ≥ 75 years. Geriatr Gerontol Int 18:1614–1619. https://doi.org/10.1111/ggi.13539

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Seidel D, Brayne C, Jagger C (2011) Limitations in physical functioning among older people as a predictor of subsequent disability in instrumental activities of daily living. Age Ageing 40:463–469. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afr054

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Poli S, Cella A, Puntoni M et al (2017) Frailty is associated with socioeconomic and lifestyle factors in community-dwelling older subjects. Aging Clin Exp Res 29:721–728. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-016-0623-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Owsley C, Allman R, Gossman M et al (2018) Mobility impairment and its consequences in the elderly. In: Clair JM, Almman R (eds) The gerontological prism: developing interdisciplinary bridges: developing interdisciplinary bridges. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  27. Li KZH, Lindenberger U, Freund AM, Baltes PB (2001) Walking while memorizing: age-related differences in compensatory behavior. Psychol Sci 12:230–237. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00341

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Poole VN, Lo O-Y, Wooten T et al (2019) Motor-cognitive neural network communication underlies walking speed in community-dwelling older adults. Front Aging Neurosci. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnagi.2019.00159

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Wollesen B, Wanstrath M, van Schooten KS, Delbaere K (2019) A taxonomy of cognitive tasks to evaluate cognitive-motor interference on spatiotemoporal gait parameters in older people: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Rev Aging Phys Act 16:12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s11556-019-0218-1

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Taillade M, Sauzéon H, Arvind Pala P et al (2013) Age-related wayfinding differences in real large-scale environments: detrimental motor control effects during spatial learning are mediated by executive decline? PLoS One 8:e67193. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0067193

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Baltes PB, Baltes MM (1993) Psychological perspectives on successful aging: the model of selective optimization with compensation. Successful aging: perspectives from the behavioral sciences. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 1–35

    Google Scholar 

  32. Zhang W, Radhakrishnan K (2018) Evidence on selection, optimization, and compensation strategies to optimize aging with multiple chronic conditions: a literature review. Geriatr Nurs N Y N 39:534–542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gerinurse.2018.02.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Guralnik JM, Simonsick EM, Ferrucci L et al (1994) A short physical performance battery assessing lower extremity function: association with self-reported disability and prediction of mortality and nursing home admission. J Gerontol 49:M85–M94. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronj/49.2.M85

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Bruyère O, Buckinx F, Beaudart C et al (2017) How clinical practitioners assess frailty in their daily practice: an international survey. Aging Clin Exp Res 29:905–912. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-017-0806-8

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Vellas B, Guigoz Y, Garry PJ et al (1999) The mini nutritional assessment (MNA) and its use in grading the nutritional state of elderly patients. Nutrition 15:116–122. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0899-9007(98)00171-3

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR (1975) Mini-mental state. J Psychiatr Res 12:189–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3956(75)90026-6

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. McNair DM, Kahn RJ, Crook SFT, Bartus R (1983) The cognitive difficulties scale. Assess Geriatr Psychopharmacol 137:143

    Google Scholar 

  38. Wettstein M, Schilling OK, Wahl HW (2016) “Still feeling healthy after all these years”: the paradox of subjective stability versus objective decline in very old adults’ health and functioning across five years. Psychol Aging 31:815–830. https://doi.org/10.1037/pag0000137

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Fors S, Thorslund M, Parker MG (2006) Do actions speak louder than words? Self-assessed and performance-based measures of physical and visual function among old people. Eur J Ageing 3:15–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10433-006-0021-5

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. Spitzer S, Weber D (2019) Who is telling the truth? Biases in self-reported physical and cognitive health status of older Europeans. IIASA Work Pap WP-19-002

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are very grateful to the services of UDCCAS Gironde that allowed them access to the elderly.

Funding

This work was supported by the National French Institute of Informatics and Mathematics (Inria), the Public funds Conseil Régional d’Aquitaine, CNSA (Caisse Nationale de la Solidarité pour l’Autonomie), Conseil Départemental de la Gironde, and CARSAT Aquitaine (Caisse d’Assurance Retraite et de la Santé au Travail) and the Fondation pour la Recherche Médicale (Grant number: DOC20161136217; PI: Sauzéon).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Bordeaux, USR 3413 SANPSY, Site Carreire, Zone Nord, Bat 3B, 3rd floor, Place Amélie Raba Léon, 33076, Bordeaux Cedex, France

    Lucile Dupuy

  2. University of Bordeaux, EA 4136, Handicap, Activity, Cognition, Health, 33000, Bordeaux, France

    Bernard N’Kaoua, Patrick Dehail & Hélène Sauzéon

  3. Flowers Research Group, Centre Inria Bordeaux Sud-Ouest, 33400, Talence, France

    Hélène Sauzéon

Authors
  1. Lucile Dupuy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bernard N’Kaoua
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Patrick Dehail
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hélène Sauzéon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lucile Dupuy.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Statement of human and animal rights

According to Helsinki declaration, approval was sought and obtained from the ethics committee of the Bordeaux University.

Informed consent

All participants provided a written consent form prior to participation in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dupuy, L., N’Kaoua, B., Dehail, P. et al. Role of cognitive resources on everyday functioning among oldest-old physically frail. Aging Clin Exp Res 32, 2021–2029 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-019-01384-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40520-019-01384-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation