4.7 Article

Operational Definition of Active and Healthy Aging (AHA): The European Innovation Partnership (EIP) on AHA Reference Site Questionnaire: Montpellier October 20-21, 2014, Lisbon July 2, 2015

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL DIRECTORS ASSOCIATION
Volume 16, Issue 12, Pages 1020-1026

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jamda.2015.09.004

Keywords

Active and healthy ageing; WHODAS 2.0; EQ-5D; SF-12; questionnaire

Funding

  1. Astra Zeneca
  2. Boehringer Ingelheim
  3. Chiesi
  4. GSK
  5. Takeda
  6. TEVA
  7. Research in Real Life
  8. National Institute for Health Research [NF-SI-0611-10084] Funding Source: researchfish

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A core operational definition of active and healthy aging (AHA) is needed to conduct comparisons. A conceptual AHA framework proposed by the European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing Reference Site Network includes several items such as functioning (individual capability and underlying body systems), well-being, activities and participation, and diseases (including non-communicable diseases, frailty, mental and oral health disorders). The instruments proposed to assess the conceptual framework of AHA have common applicability and availability attributes. The approach includes core and optional domains/instruments depending on the needs and the questions. A major common domain is function, as measured by the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0). WHODAS 2.0 can be used across all diseases and healthy individuals. It covers many of the AHA dimensions proposed by the Reference Site network. However, WHODAS 2.0 does not include all dimensions proposed for AHA assessment. The second common domain is health-related quality of life (HRQoL). A report of the AHA questionnaire in the form of a spider net has been proposed to facilitate usual comparisons across individuals and groups of interest. (C) 2015 Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of AMDA - The Society for Post-Acute and Long-Term Care Medicine.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available