The reporting and handling of missing data in longitudinal studies of older adults is suboptimal: a methodological survey of geriatric journals.

BACKGROUND: Missing data are common in longitudinal studies, and more so, in studies of older adults, who are susceptible to health and functional decline that limit completion of assessments. We assessed the extent, current reporting, and handling of missing data in longitudinal studies of older adults. METHODS: Medline and Embase databases were searched from 2015 to 2019 for publications on longitudinal observational studies conducted among persons ≥55 years old. The search was restricted to 10 general geriatric journals published in English. Reporting and handling of missing data were assessed using questions developed from the recommended standards. Data were summarised descriptively as frequencies and proportions. RESULTS: A total of 165 studies were included in the review from 7032 identified records. In approximately half of the studies 97 (62.5%), there was either no comment on missing data or unclear descriptions. The percentage of missing data varied from 0.1 to 55%, with a 14% average among the studies that reported having missing data. Complete case analysis was the most common method for handling missing data with nearly 75% of the studies (n = 52) excluding individual observations due to missing data, at the initial phase of study inclusion or at the analysis stage. Of the 10 studies where multiple imputation was used, only 1 (10.0%) study followed the guideline for reporting the procedure fully using online supplementary documents. CONCLUSION: The current reporting and handling of missing data in longitudinal observational studies of older adults are inadequate. Journal endorsement and implementation of guidelines may potentially improve the quality of missing data reporting. Further, authors should be encouraged to use online supplementary files to provide additional details on how missing data were addressed, to allow for more transparency and comprehensive appraisal of studies.

Exploring participant attrition in a longitudinal follow-up of older adults: the Global Longitudinal Study of Osteoporosis in Women (GLOW) Hamilton cohort.

OBJECTIVE: We explored the magnitude of attrition, its pattern and risk factors for different forms of attrition in the cohort from the Global Longitudinal Study of Osteoporosis in Women. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Participants were recruited from physician practices in Hamilton, Ontario. PARTICIPANTS: Postmenopausal women aged ≥55 years who had consulted their primary care physician within the last 2 years. OUTCOME MEASURES: Time to all-cause, non-death, death, preventable and non-preventable attrition. RESULTS: All 3985 women enrolled in the study were included in the analyses. The mean age of the cohort was 69.4 (SD: 8.9) years. At the end of the follow-up, 30.2% (1206/3985) of the study participants had either died or were lost to follow-up. The pattern of attrition was monotone with most participants failing to return after a missed survey. The different types of attrition examined shared common risk factors including age, smoking and being frail but differed on factors such as educational level, race, hospitalisation, quality of life and being prefrail. CONCLUSION: Attrition in this ageing cohort was selective to some participant characteristics. Minimising potential bias associated with such non-random attrition would require targeted measures to achieve maximum possible follow-rates among the high-risk groups identified and dealing with specific reasons for attrition in the study design and analysis.

The Geras virtual frailty rehabilitation program to build resilience in older adults with frailty during COVID-19: a randomized feasibility trial.

BACKGROUND: The Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic has exacerbated the risk for poor physical and mental health outcomes among vulnerable older adults. Multicomponent interventions could potentially prevent or reduce the risk of becoming frail; however, there is limited evidence about utilizing alternative modes of delivery where access to in-person care may be challenging. This randomized feasibility trial aimed to understand how a multicomponent rehabilitation program can be delivered remotely to vulnerable older adults with frailty during the pandemic. METHODS: Participants were randomized to either a multimodal or socialization arm. Over a 12-week intervention period, the multimodal group received virtual care at home, which included twice-weekly exercise in small group physiotherapy-led live-streamed sessions, nutrition counselling and protein supplementation, medication consultation via a videoconference app, and once-weekly phone calls from student volunteers, while the socialization group received only once-weekly phone calls from the volunteers. The RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance) framework was used to evaluate the feasibility of the program. The main clinical outcomes were change in the 5-times sit-to-stand test (5 × STS) and Depression, Anxiety and Stress Scale (DASS-21) scores. The feasibility outcomes were analyzed using descriptive statistics and expressed as frequencies and mean percent with corresponding confidence intervals (CI). Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used for the effectiveness component. RESULTS: The program enrolled 33% (n = 72) of referrals to the study (n = 220), of whom 70 were randomized. Adoption rates from different referral sources were community self-referrals (60%), community organizations (33%), and healthcare providers (25%). At the provider level, implementation rates varied from 75 to 100% for different aspects of program delivery. Participant's adherence levels included virtual exercise sessions 81% (95% CI: 75-88%), home-based exercise 50% (95% CI: 38-62%), protein supplements consumption 68% (95% CI: 55-80%), and medication optimization 38% (95% CI: 21-59%). Most participants (85%) were satisfied with the program. There were no significant changes in clinical outcomes between the two arms. CONCLUSION: The GERAS virtual frailty rehabilitation study for community-dwelling older adults living with frailty was feasible in terms of reach of participants, adoption across referral settings, adherence to implementation, and participant's intention to maintain the program. This program could be feasibly delivered to improve access to socially isolated older adults where barriers to in-person participation exist. However, trials with larger samples and longer follow-up are required to demonstrate effectiveness and sustained behavior change. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04500366. Registered August 5, 2020, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04500366.