The aim of this study was to clarify the relationship between physical fitness elements in healthy older adults, considering the differences between gender and between age. Subjects were 1042 active and non-injured people aged from 60 years to under 90 years. The subjects were classified into two different age groups of under 75 years group and 75 years and over group. A total of 11 variables representing four physical fitness elements (muscular, joint, neural, and respiratory functions) were selected through examination of safety and validity. Two-way ANOVA was used to examine gender and age differences in each physical fitness element. Pearson's correlation coefficient and partial correlation coefficient excluding age factor were calculated for each gender and age group.
As a result of examining the relationship among physical fitness elements, the correlation coefficients within variables consisting of the following each function, muscular function, joint function and agility of extremities, were significant in both age groups, and these tendencies were consistent in both gender groups. Similarly, significant correlation coefficients between standing-reach and muscular function variables, and between trunk twist and foot balance with eyes open and reaction time were found in the under 75 years group, but not in the over 75 years group. On the other hand, different tendencies between genders were found in the relationship between the muscular function variables and trunk twist and foot balance with eyes open, and between the reaction time and stepping and muscular function variables. As the relationships among physical fitness elements tended to decline in the over 75 years group, it is inferred that this tendency is influenced by the change with aging of physical fitness characteristics and environmental factors around the older adults.

The purpose of this study was to propose useful ADLs (activities of daily living) and scales to estimate ADL ability on community older people from the viewpoints of aging, physical fitness level, and interrelationship among ADL. The survey constructing of 15 ADL items and physical fitness test of Ministry of Education, Science and Culture were carried out on 458 older people. Each ADL item was constructed with 3 level scales.
As the results of this study, the following 12 ADLs were proposed as useful ADL items; in the locomotion domain, jumping across a ditch, walking, running, up and down stairs, and transfer; in the manipulation domain, taking bedding in and out, buttoning a shirt; in stability domain, standing in the bus or train, dressing while standing (trousers), standing on one foot with eyes open; in the posture-change domain, sitting up, standing up from the floor. These items were significantly related to age and physical fitness elements contributed largely to achievement of each ADL. Since significant high correlation was found between the index using 12 ADL items and that using 15 items, it is considered that the 12 items scale can account for the variance corresponded enough to that of 15 items scale, and that the new index is practical and simple.
In further research, it will be required to examine validity of each ADL item and index by using more large sample, and to clarify the relation to various factors influenced to ADL ability level.

OBJECTIVEIn this study, we examined the characteristics of depression determination using four representative self-rating depression scales (Geriatric Depression Scale, GDS; Self-rating Depression Scale, SDS; Center for Epidermiologic Studies Depression Scale, CES-D; and Carroll Rating Scale, CRS) applied to Japanese community-dwelling elderly.

METHODSSubjects were 563 community-dwelling independent elderly living in twelve prefectures (330 males, 68,9±6.3 yr; 233 females, 68.1±5.8 yr).

RESULTSDepression rates determined using SDS (45.8%) and CES-D (68.6%) were higher than those determined using GDS (5.7%) and CRS (14.7%). Although correlations of depression scale scores among the four scales were significant and comparable (r: 0.61 (GDS vs. SDS, p<0.01) to 0.78 (SDS vs. CES-D, p<0.01)), the agreement in depression determination varied among scales (kappa coefficients: 0.05 (GDS vs. CES-D, p>0.05) to 0.46 (SDS vs. CES-D, p<0.01)).

CONCLUSIONSSimilarities in depression determination were found between GDS and CRS, and between CES-D and SDS. Depression rates determined on the basis of cut-off point for each scale were higher for CES-D and SDS than for GDS and CRS. Depression determination using a four-point rating scale may overestimate a slightly depressive symptom, compared with that using a two-point scale.