RESUMEN
Life expectancy has increased worldwide alongside a rise in disability prevalence during old age. The impact and interrelationship among the precursors of disability in midlife remain to be better understood. Furthermore, investigating whether lifestyle factors may potentially influence health outcomes and the prognosis of vascular disease could be especially relevant among the middle-aged population, which is a priority subpopulation when prevention is the goal. This is an observational, cross-sectional and population-based study. Participants, between 50 and 55 years old, are randomly selected from the municipality of Toledo (Spain). There are six non-consecutive days for the assessments, providing enough rest between evaluations. Participants perform the interview of the Toledo Study for Healthy Aging. Blood pressure monitoring and a resting electrocardiogram are also recorded. Then, resting peripheral and cerebral vascular measurements along with muscle size and architecture are assessed. Blood and urine samples, and body composition data are collected after an overnight fasting. On a different visit, physical performance and muscle function tests are performed. Additionally, brain magnetic resonance imaging is conducted. And finally, an accelerometer is given to the participants for a week. Frailty is evaluated by Frailty Trait Scale and Fried Frailty Phenotype. This project will shed light on the associations between frailty, early cognitive impairment, and vascular aging during midlife, and on the role that lifestyles play in their development. Lastly, this project will provide meaningful implications for public health strategies aimed at promoting healthy aging in later life.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Although the metabolic equivalents (METs) system is a common procedure to quantify the intensity of physical activity in older adults, it remains unclear whether the conventional METs intensity thresholds (CTs) used for this purpose are appropriate in this population. Therefore, this study aimed (i) to derive overall and fitness-specific METs intensity thresholds in older adults ≥ 60 years old (OATs) expressed both in standard METs (VO2/3.5 mL O2·kg-1·min-1) and older adults METs60+ (VO2/2.7 mL O2·kg-1·min-1), and (ii) to compare them with the CTs. METHODS: A total of 93 subjects were assessed for cardiorespiratory fitness. Graded exercise test protocols using indirect calorimetry were performed to calculate individual VO2max and categorize subjects as "very poor/fair" or "good/superior" fitness. Overall and fitness-specific OATs expressed in standard METs (OATsstandard) and METs60+ (OATs60+) were derived based on the %VO2max and the ventilatory thresholds (VTs) physical intensity categories. RESULTS: Significantly higher VO2max, VO2 at VT1 and VO2 at VT2 (p < 0.001) were obtained in the "good/superior" subgroup compared to the "very poor/fair" fitness subgroup. Accordingly, OATs were approximately 69% higher in individuals with a "good/superior" fitness compared to those with a "very poor/fair" fitness. Furthermore, this study showed that OATsstandard were approximately 21-24% lower than OATs60+, and 10-22% higher OATs were observed when following the VTs intensity categories (heavy-intensity physical activity [HPA] and severe-intensity physical activity [SPA]) compared to the %VO2max categories (moderate-intensity physical activity [MPA] and vigorous-intensity physical activity [VPA]). When compared with the CTs, similar or higher OATsstandard and OATs60+ for MPA, and HPA were obtained compared to the conventional MPA threshold (3.0 METs). Conversely, for VPA and SPA, lower, similar, or higher OATs were obtained depending on the METs derivation approach (OATsstandard or OATs60+) or the intensity categories (VO2max or VTs), compared to the conventional VPA threshold (6.0 METs). CONCLUSIONS: None of the derived OATs were concurrently similar to the CTs, suggesting that fitness-specific METs intensity thresholds adapted to the METs derivation approach should be used in older adults. TRIAL REGISTRATION: FenotipAGING (Non-health-care intervention study), PRO-Training (NCT05619250).