Time Out-of-Home and Cognitive, Physical, and Emotional Wellbeing of Older Adults: A Longitudinal Mixed Effects Model

Johanna Petersen, Daniel Austin, Nora Mattek, Jeffrey Kaye, Johanna Petersen, Daniel Austin, Nora Mattek, Jeffrey Kaye

Abstract

Background: Time out-of-home has been linked with numerous health outcomes, including cognitive decline, poor physical ability and low emotional state. Comprehensive characterization of this important health metric would potentially enable objective monitoring of key health outcomes. The objective of this study is to determine the relationship between time out-of-home and cognitive status, physical ability and emotional state.

Methods and findings: Participants included 85 independent older adults, age 65-96 years (M = 86.36; SD = 6.79) who lived alone, from the Intelligent Systems for Assessing Aging Changes (ISAAC) and the ORCATECH Life Laboratory cohorts. Factors hypothesized to affect time out-of-home were assessed on three different temporal levels: yearly (cognitive status, loneliness, clinical walking speed), weekly (pain and mood) or daily (time out-of-home, in-home walking speed, weather, and season). Subject characteristics including age, race, and gender were assessed at baseline. Total daily time out-of-home in hours was assessed objectively and unobtrusively for up to one year using an in-home activity sensor platform. A longitudinal tobit mixed effects regression model was used to relate daily time out-of-home to cognitive status, physical ability and emotional state. More hours spend outside the home was associated with better cognitive function as assessed using the Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR) Scale, where higher scores indicate lower cognitive function (βCDR = -1.69, p<0.001). More hours outside the home was also associated with superior physical ability (βPain = -0.123, p<0.001) and improved emotional state (βLonely = -0.046, p<0.001; βLow mood = -0.520, p<0.001). Weather, season, and weekday also affected the daily time out-of-home.

Conclusions: These results suggest that objective longitudinal monitoring of time out-of-home may enable unobtrusive assessment of cognitive, physical and emotional state. In addition, these results indicate that the factors affecting out-of-home behavior are complex, with factors such as living environment, weather and season significantly affecting time out-of-home. Studies investigating the relationship between time out-of-home and health outcomes may be optimized by taking into account the environment and life factors presented here.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing Interests: The research was funded in part by the Intel Corporation. This does not alter the authors’ adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials.

Figures

Fig 1. Histogram of the daily hours…
Fig 1. Histogram of the daily hours spent outside the home, showing the limit at zero.
A normal distribution curve is plotted as a dashed line to show the data is approximately normally distributed except at and below zero.
Fig 2. Relationship between loneliness and time…
Fig 2. Relationship between loneliness and time out-of-home.
a) Probability density of the hours spent outside the home as a function of the UCLA Loneliness Scale. To create this graph, the probability density function is calculated at each value of the UCLA Loneliness Scale using the output from the Tobit model (all other variables are held at their mean or most prevalent value for binary variables). Color represents density, and discrete probabilities were linearly interpolated for graphical clarity. The mean function, μ (black trace) has been overlaid on the plot to show central tendency. As can be seen, the average amount of time spent outside the home given a participant leaves the home decreases from 5.0 hours at a UCLA Loneliness score of 21 (the lowest observed) to 3.7 hours at a UCLA Loneliness score of 56 (the highest observed). b) Probability of leaving the home on a given day as a function of the UCLA Loneliness score. The probability of leaving drops by about 10% across the range of loneliness scores such that the loneliest individual has an 80% probability of leaving on any given day, while the least lonely has a 90% probability of leaving on any given day.

References

    1. Gagliardi C, Marcellini F, Papa R, Giuli C, Mollenkopf H. Associations of personal and mobility resources with subjective well-being among older adults in Italy and Germany. Arch Gerontol Geriatr. 2010;50(1):42–7. 10.1016/j.archger.2009.01.007
    1. Heyl V, Wahl H-W, Mollenkopf H. Visual capacity, out-of-home activities and emotional well-being in old age: basic relations and contextual variation. Social Indicators Research. 2005;74(1):159–89.
    1. Wahl HW, Wettstein M, Shoval N, Oswald F, Kaspar R, Issacson M, et al. Interplay of Cognitive and Motivational Resources for Out-of-Home Behavior in a Sample of Cognitively Heterogeneous Older Adults: Findings of the SenTra Project. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2012;68(5):691–702. 10.1093/geronb/gbs106
    1. Ziegler F, Schwanen T. 'I like to go out to be energised by different people': an exploratory analysis of mobility and wellbeing in later life. Ageing and Society. 2011;31(5):758.
    1. Tunstall J. Old and alone: a sociological study of old people. London: Routledge & K. Paul; 1966.
    1. Petersen J, Austin D, Kaye J, Pavel M, Hayes T. Unobtrusive in-home detection of time spent out-of-home with applications to loneliness and physical activity. Biomedical and Health Informatics, IEEE Journal of. 2013;PP(99):1-.
    1. Suzuki T, Murase S. Influence of outdoor activity and indoor activity on cognition decline: use of an infrared sensor to measure activity. Telemed J E Health. 2010;16(6):686–90. 10.1089/tmj.2009.0175
    1. James BD, Boyle PA, Buchman AS, Barnes LL, Bennett DA. Life space and risk of Alzheimer disease, mild cognitive impairment, and cognitive decline in old age. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2011;19(11):961–9. 10.1097/JGP.0b013e318211c219
    1. Wettstein M, Wahl H-W, Shoval N, Oswald F, Voss E, Seidl U, et al. Out-of-Home Behavior and Cognitive Impairment in Older Adults: Findings of the SenTra Project. Journal of Applied Gerontology. 2012. 10.1177/0733464812459373
    1. Crowe M, Andel R, Wadley VG, Okonkwo OC, Sawyer P, Allman RM. Life-space and cognitive decline in a community-based sample of African American and Caucasian older adults. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2008;63(11):1241–5.
    1. Shoval N, Wahl H-W, Auslander G, Isaacson M, Oswald F, Edry T, et al. Use of the global positioning system to measure the out-of-home mobility of older adults with differing cognitive functioning. Ageing & Society. 2011;31(05):849–69. 10.1017/S0144686X10001455
    1. McKenna K, Broome K, Liddle J. What older people do: Time use and exploring the link between role participation and life satisfaction in people aged 65 years and over. Australian Occupational Therapy Journal. 2007;54(4):273–84.
    1. Leech JA, Nelson WC, Burnett RT, Aaron S, Raizenne ME. It's about time: a comparison of Canadian and American time-activity patterns. J Expo Anal Environ Epidemiol. 2002;12(6):427–32.
    1. Molin J, Mellerup E, Bolwig T, Scheike T, Dam H. The influence of climate on development of winter depression. Journal of affective disorders. 1996;37(2):151–5.
    1. Mukamal KJ, Wellenius GA, Suh HH, Mittleman MA. Weather and air pollution as triggers of severe headaches. Neurology. 2009;72(10):922–7. 10.1212/01.wnl.0000344152.56020.94
    1. Denissen JJA, Butalid L, Penke L, Van Aken MAG. The effects of weather on daily mood: a multilevel approach. Emotion. 2008;8(5):662 10.1037/a0013497
    1. Cress ME, Orini S, Kinsler L. Living environment and mobility of older adults. Gerontology. 2010;57(3):287–94. 10.1159/000322195
    1. Levasseur M, Gauvin L, Richard L, Kestens Y, Daniel M, Payette H. Associations between perceived proximity to neighborhood resources, disability, and social participation among community-dwelling older adults: results from the VoisiNuAge study. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2011;92(12):1979–86. 10.1016/j.apmr.2011.06.035
    1. Webber SC, Porter MM, Menec VH. Mobility in older adults: a comprehensive framework. Gerontologist. 2010;50(4):443–50. 10.1093/geront/gnq013
    1. Kaye JA, Maxwell SA, Mattek N, Hayes TL, Dodge H, Pavel M, et al. Intelligent Systems For Assessing Aging Changes: home-based, unobtrusive, and continuous assessment of aging. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2010;66 Suppl 1:i180–90.
    1. Folstein M, Folstein S, McHugh P. "Mini-mental state"—a practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research. 1975;12:189–98.
    1. Morris J. The clinical dementia rating (CDR): Current version and scoring rules. Neurology. 1993;43:2412–4.
    1. Russell D, Peplau LA, Cutrona CE. The revised UCLA Loneliness Scale: concurrent and discriminant validity evidence. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1980;39(3):472–80.
    1. Russell DW. UCLA Loneliness Scale (Version 3): reliability, validity, and factor structure. J Pers Assess. 1996;66(1):20–40.
    1. Buracchio T, Dodge HH, Howieson D, Wasserman D, Kaye J. The trajectory of gait speed preceding mild cognitive impairment. Arch Neurol. 2010;67(8):980–6. 10.1001/archneurol.2010.159
    1. Hagler S, Austin D, Hayes T, Kaye J, Pavel M. Unobtrusive and Ubiquitous In-Home Monitoring: A Methodology for Continuous Assessment of Gait Velocity in Elders. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 2009. 10.1109/TBME.2009.2036732
    1. Kaye J, Mattek N, Dodge HH, Campbell I, Hayes T, Austin D, et al. Unobtrusive measurement of daily computer use to detect mild cognitive impairment. Alzheimer's & Dementia. 2014;10(1):10–7. 10.1016/j.jalz.2013.01.011
    1. U.S. Naval Observatory AAD. Sun or Moon Rise/Set Table for One Year. Available: [cited 2013 June 5, 2013].
    1. U.S. Department of Commerce NCDC. NNDC Climate Data Online. Available: [cited 2013].
    1. Twisk J, Rijmen F. Longitudinal tobit regression: a new approach to analyze outcome variables with floor or ceiling effects. J Clin Epidemiol. 2009;62(9):953–8. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.10.003
    1. McDonald JF, Moffitt RA. The uses of Tobit analysis. The review of economics and statistics. 1980;62(2):318–21.
    1. Roncek DW. Learning more from tobit coefficients: Extending a comparative analysis of political protest. American Sociological Review. 1992:503–7.
    1. Allison P. When Can You Safely Ignore Multicollinearity? Statiscical Horizons2012 [cited 2014 November 1, 2014]. Available: .
    1. Kaspar R, Oswald F, Wahl H-W, Voss E, Wettstein M. Daily Mood and Out-of-Home Mobility in Older Adults: Does Cognitive Impairment Matter? Journal of Applied Gerontology. 2012. 10.1177/0733464812466290
    1. Kaye J, Mattek N, Dodge H, Buracchio T, Austin D, Hagler S, et al. One walk a year to 1000 within a year: Continuous in-home unobtrusive gait assessment of older adults. Gait & Posture. 2012;35(2):197–202. 10.1016/j.gaitpost.2011.09.006
    1. Dodge HH, Mattek NC, Austin D, Hayes TL, Kaye JA. In-home walking speeds and variability trajectories associated with mild cognitive impairment. Neurology. 2012;78(24):1946–52. 10.1212/WNL.0b013e318259e1de
    1. Thielke SM, Mattek NC, Hayes TL, Dodge HH, Quinones AR, Austin D, et al. Associations between observed in-home behaviors and self-reported low mood in community-dwelling older adults. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2014;62(4):685–9. 10.1111/jgs.12744
    1. Cacioppo JT, Hawkley LC, Berntson GG, Ernst JM, Gibbs AC, Stickgold R, et al. Do lonely days invade the nights? Potential social modulation of sleep efficiency. Psychol Sci. 2002;13(4):384–7.
    1. Pinquart M, Sorensen S. Influences on Loneliness in Older Adults: A Meta-Analysis. Basic and Applied Social Psychology. 2001;23(4):245–66.
    1. Austin D, Cross RM, Hayes T, Kaye J. Regularity and predictability of human mobility in personal space. PLoS One. 2014;9(2):e90256 10.1371/journal.pone.0090256

Source: PubMed

3
Abonneren