ライフサイエンスコーパス: physical function

1 /or nerve function), and 6-minute-walk test (physical function).

2 L, a health-related quality of life measure (physical function).

3 mproved subjective and objective measures of physical function.

4 ant as the fibrotic healing response impairs physical function.

5 e without the confounding impact of impaired physical function.

6 are potentially protective against declining physical function.

7 changes of the physical activity levels and physical function.

8 without the confounding effects of impaired physical function.

9 rance were nonmodifiable factors linked with physical function.

10 lead to an improvement in pain intensity and physical function.

11 issue and systemic inflammation and enhanced physical function.

12 ance to most patients, such as cognitive and physical function.

13 reast cancer may experience deterioration of physical function.

14 ) and improves cardiorespiratory fitness and physical function.

15 other patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and physical function.

16 betes, or to participants with moderate/high physical function.

17 disability with vision-related function and physical function.

18 2 months, BP, B-type natriuretic peptide, or physical function.

19 nd weakness associated with an impairment of physical function.

20 effects in rats with CKD and improved their physical function.

21 socioeconomic position and performance-based physical function.

22 he promise of MSL materials for chemical and physical functions.

23 body composition, bone mineral density, and physical functions.

24 rimer on serum bicarbonate concentration and physical functioning.

25 ith short-term effects on pain intensity and physical functioning.

26 ize the impact of metastatic bone disease on physical functioning.

27 ic status, relationship (couple) status, and physical functioning.

28 cally relevant depressive symptoms, and poor physical functioning.

29 having no cognitive impairment; and 3) good physical functioning.

30 OMAC) Pain (0-10, no to extreme pain), WOMAC Physical Function (0-10, no to extreme difficulty), and

31 [-7.28 to -4.36] vs -7.0 [-9.17 to -4.87]), physical functioning (0.1 [-1.10 to 1.28] vs 2.0 [0.22 t

32 r age at operation was associated with worse physical-functioning (-0.4/yr, P = 0.008).

33 s APT, fatigue -1.22, 95% CI -0.52 to -1.97, physical function 1.54, 0.86 to 2.31; GET vs APT, fatigu

34 s APT, fatigue -1.37, 95% CI -0.76 to -2.21, physical function 1.90, 1.10 to 2.91), but not CBT.

35 o 4.78), appetite loss (1.2, -1.27 to 3.67), physical functioning (-1.9, -3.91 to 0.15), or global he

36 t mediated via total count of comorbidities: physical functioning 17.8% [men] versus 7.7% [women] and

37 significant prognostic factors reported were physical functioning (17 [39%] studies) and global healt

38 esidence at 6 months post discharge, and (3) physical function 2 months post discharge.

39 ; GET vs APT, fatigue -1.86, -0.80 to -2.89, physical function 2.35, 1.35 to 3.39).

40 -0.48 point [CI, -0.82 to -0.14 point]) and physical functioning (2 RCTs; MD, 2.50 [CI, 0.90 to 4.10

41 , 0.20-1.03]) and in the score for the SF-36 physical functioning (22.4 [99% CI, 16.3-28.5] vs 12.6 [

42 cal illness patients had significantly lower physical function (3 mo: short physical performance batt

43 istically significant (adjusted estimate for Physical Functioning = 4.2, p = 0.14; for Role Physical

44 ited or no evidence of disease, specifically physical function (41.1 v 46.6, respectively), fatigue (

45 ain interference (52.4), fatigue (52.2), and physical function (44.1).

46 ioning and memory), as well as 2 measures of physical functioning (a Short Physical Performance Batte

47 cts completed surveys about their visual and physical functioning ability.

48 gue, anxiety, depression, sleep disturbance, physical function, ability to participate in social role

49 tremity pain had greater odds of having poor physical function according to scores on the Health Asse

50 Trial, we examined incident deterioration of physical function after 12 months, defined as a >/= 10-p

51 r, may play an important role in maintaining physical function among older adults.

52 rtality, health-related quality of life, and physical function among sepsis survivors who developed c

53 of a confirmatory study designed to preserve physical function among survivors of breast cancer.

54 ervention in critical illness, be focused on physical function and assessed months or even years afte

55 e, and length; base of support), self-report physical function and disability, and falls in the past

56 The level of physical function and disuse is often associated with ag

57 PROMIS domain: 2.5 to 6.5 T-score points for physical function and fatigue, 2.5 to 7.5 for social rol

58 Baseline physical function and health-related quality of life did

59 cal illness patients had significantly lower physical function and health-related quality of life on

60 s associated with substantial impairments in physical function and health-related quality of life tha

61 s associated with substantial impairments in physical function and health-related quality of life tha

62 Improvements in physical function and mental health are evident in the 2

63 Physical function and mental health improved over time;

64 Factors that were associated with physical function and mental health outcomes over time t

65 ere used to identify factors associated with physical function and mental health over time.

66 as related to mortality after adjustment for physical function and other confounders.

67 ful, swollen joints that can severely impair physical function and quality of life.

68 have musculoskeletal pain that limits their physical function and quality of life.

69 The secondary outcomes included WOMAC physical function and stiffness subscores and the WOMAC

70 es have reported significant improvements in physical function and strength after training programs o

71 biomarker signatures and decreased long-term physical function and survival.

72 CKD) exhibit reduced exercise capacity, poor physical function and symptoms of fatigue.

73 joint models of longitudinal trajectories of physical function and waiting list mortality adjusted fo

74 ssessed associations of cognition with later physical functioning and associations of physical functi

75 st bidirectional associations of memory with physical functioning and less evidence of associations o

76 adequacy was associated with improvements in Physical Functioning and Role Physical of 7.3 (p = 0.02)

77 At 6-month follow-up, adjusted increases in Physical Functioning and Role Physical scores for every

78 ranted to assess the effects of veverimer on physical functioning and to assess other deleterious con

79 ularly memory, is associated with subsequent physical functioning and vice versa.

80 bodily pain, 76.5% (95% CI, 74.6%-78.5%) for physical function, and 59.5% (95% CI, 56.4%-62.7%) for w

81 Cognitive function, physical function, and basic daily life skills are asses

82 urvival, brain function, cognitive function, physical function, and basic daily life skills are asses

83 urvival, brain function, cognitive function, physical function, and basic daily life skills.

84 n index, abdominal aortic calcification, BP, physical function, and blood markers of mineral metaboli

85 that preserve an individual's independence, physical function, and cognition.

86 cations, including muscle weakness, impaired physical function, and decreased health-related quality

87 ongitudinal epidemiology of muscle weakness, physical function, and health-related quality of life an

88 nt improvements in scores assessing pain and physical function, and in PGA-OA, although the improveme

89 l and psychological symptom burden, impaired physical function, and inferior survival compared with t

90 to older patients, such as quality of life, physical function, and maintenance of independence.

91 included: younger age, venous edema, poorer physical function, and more depressive symptoms.

92 es: cognition, muscle and/or nerve function, physical function, and pulmonary function.

93 us, and evaluated global nutritional status, physical function, and quality of life before and after

94 vity would increase fat-free mass, strength, physical function, and quality of life, and reduce the r

95 inical and MRI measures of disease activity, physical function, and quality of life.

96 comes were muscle power and quality, overall physical function, and total body and thigh compositions

97 mprovement, compared with baseline, in pain, physical function, and walk time over 3 years, but the p

98 urveys collect self-reported data on health, physical functioning, and biomarkers.

99 stance due to deterioration in cognition and physical functioning, and changes in behavior.

100 uding incidence of chronic diseases, memory, physical functioning, and mental health, among populatio

101 (TSMBs) on the experienced pain and fatigue, physical functions, and mental focus of surgeons.

102 care unit mortality, hospital mortality, and physical function- and mental health-related quality of

103 or relieve symptoms, including pain; improve physical function; and improve the patient's treatment s

104 Depressive symptoms and impaired physical functioning are prevalent among older adults.

105 at reported a measure of muscle structure or physical function as an outcome measure.

106 on, evidence supports the use of measures of physical function as independent predictors of survival.

107 l SAQ domains including angina frequency and physical function, as well as the role physical and role

108 Physical function assessed at baseline, 6 months (ie, at

109 ed by the Chalder Fatigue Questionnaire) and physical function (assessed by the Short Form-36 physica

110 Physical function assessments were available for 86% of

111 ng: maximal leg strength, timed chair stand, physical function battery, gait characteristics (speed;

112 mptoms within 3-5 years of age and declining physical functions before attaining puberty.

113 y (57%) showed no significant differences in physical function between groups.

114 eps per day, health-related quality of life, physical function, blood pressure, and satisfaction.

115 l-being with subscales that address not only physical functioning but also psycho-social issues.

116 pain and to 70.2% (95% CI, 67.8%-72.5%) for physical function, but improvement rates for walk time,

117 late host regenerative processes and improve physical function by regulating long noncoding RNA in re

118 sed comprehensively, including cognitive and physical function, coexisting medical conditions, demogr

119 s criteria to be designated as core domains: physical function, cognition, mental health, survival, p

120 nce, emotional well-being and relationships, physical function, cognitive function, or spirituality.

121 e nursing home model has positive effects on physical function compared to traditional nursing homes.

122 oids associated with improvement in pain and physical function compared with sham injection or no int

123 onths, the YG group had greater increases in physical functioning compared with both ST and WL groups

124 on antihypertensive medication had impaired physical functioning compared with other LT patients.

125 he covariate-adjusted mean difference on the physical function composite was -1.5 (95% confidence int

126 Impaired physical functioning correlated with decreased left ante

127 the percentage with improvement in pain and physical function decreased between year 1 and year 3.

128 Secondary outcomes included physical function, depression, medication use, and quali

129 We measured physical activity level, physical functioning, depression level, and health-relat

130 tosterone therapy had little to no effect on physical functioning, depressive symptoms, energy and vi

131 device profiles offering the higher level of physical functioning despite mortality and bleeding risk

132 ion of participants who experienced incident physical function deterioration after 12 months was 16.3

133 ve weight lifting to reduce the incidence of physical function deterioration among survivors of breas

134 with standard care reduced the incidence of physical function deterioration among survivors of breas

135 hnicity, body mass index, physical activity, physical functioning, diabetes, hypertension, or coronar

136 fectiveness for relieving pain and improving physical function differ between these two therapies is

137 ctioning (Kidney Disease and Quality of Life-Physical Function Domain) versus placebo with a mean pla

138 Higher Short-Form-36 physical functioning domain scores at the prior visit we

139 rated the greatest odds of difficulty with 3 physical function domains, including activities of daily

140 Better physical functioning during recovery predicted subsequen

141 capacity, contractile function, and applied physical function (e.g. rotarod, treadmill, grip test, a

142 nd 24 months after radiotherapy: fatigue and physical functioning (EORTC QLQ-C30); cosmetic status, b

143 a lower level of functioning, improvement in physical functioning equivalent to a change from New Yor

144 y and durability of improvements in pain and physical function following Roux-en-Y gastric bypass (RY

145 ncy and is a valid and responsive measure of physical function for ICU patients.

146 duals with cerebral palsy seek, not improved physical function for its own sake.

147 Mean improvement in physical function for the surgery and PT groups was 22.4

148 ificant, with key sex-specific inferences on physical function, frailty, disability, and pharmacodyna

149 mpared objective and self-report measures of physical function, gait patterns, and falls between wome

150 ing between populations with low versus high physical function has not been addressed.

151 iation between purpose in life and objective physical function has not been examined.

152 aracteristics, income, health, cognitive and physical function, health behaviors, subjective beliefs

153 ween preadmission socioeconomic position and physical function, health-related quality of life and su

154 sociation between socioeconomic position and physical function, health-related quality of life, or su

155 poorer self-rated health, mental health, and physical functioning, higher probability of smoking, and

156 everyday-activities domains of the Migraine Physical Function Impact Diary (scale transformed to 0 t

157 37% (95% confidence interval, 31%, 43%) had physical function impairment (Short Physical Performance

158 Identifying factors associated with physical function impairment and frailty can help target

159 ) are at risk for accelerated development of physical function impairment and frailty; both associate

160 Physical function impairment was common among middle-age

161 and physical inactivity were associated with physical function impairment; depression and hypertensio

162 containing HMB, on skeletal muscle mass and physical function in a variety of clinical conditions ch

163 a reliable, valid, and responsive measure of physical function in acute respiratory distress syndrome

164 RDA (2RDA) affects skeletal muscle mass and physical function in elderly men.In this parallel-group

165 Minimal floor effects were observed for the Physical Function in ICU Test-scored across all time poi

166 Limitations exist for Physical Function in ICU Test-scored and De Morton Mobil

167 the clinimetric properties of two measures (Physical Function in ICU Test-scored and De Morton Mobil

168 Physical function tests (Physical Function in ICU Test-scored and De Morton Mobil

169 (1-7%) and a significant ceiling effect for Physical Function in ICU Test-scored at hospital dischar

170 The Physical Function in ICU Test-scored is one of four reco

171 uding reducing IMAT) and muscle strength and physical function in obese elderly, but those with highe

172 ng (RT) improves muscle strength and overall physical function in older adults.

173 Sodium bicarbonate to improve physical function in patients over 60 years with advance

174 ulted in modest improvement in self-reported physical function in patients with hip and knee osteoart

175 utical supplementation on pain intensity and physical function in patients with knee/hip OA.

176 anical footwear therapy may improve pain and physical function in people with symptomatic knee osteoa

177 he Oral sGC Stimulator Vericiguat to Improve Physical Functioning in Daily Living Activities of Patie

178 the interrelationships between cognitive and physical functioning in older adults is critical to dete

179 s have important implications for health and physical functioning in older age, and physical activity

180 mo had no effect on depressive symptoms and physical functioning in older persons with relatively lo

181 y reduce cancer-related symptoms and improve physical functioning in patients with RCC.

182 (APT) or SMC alone in improving fatigue and physical functioning in people with chronic fatigue synd

183 lls played a synergistic role in cardiac and physical functions in the aged monkeys by regulation of

184 wait time and low baseline MELD; decline in physical function is associated with an increased risk o

185 Effect on performance-based physical function is unknown.

186 Evaluation of physical functioning is central to patient recovery from

187 erence was statistically significant for the physical function item which was lower.

188 erimer resulted in improved patient-reported physical functioning (Kidney Disease and Quality of Life

189 Chronic inflammation may fuel declines in physical function leading to frailty and disability.

190 derness and crepitus), objective measures of physical function, levels of physical activity, features

191 ssociated with higher risk of depression and physical function loss among MSM.

192 This is important because poor physical function may be associated with premature morta

193 cations 10 years after surgery, for example, physical function (MD -15, 95% CI -24 to -7), fatigue (M

194 e, 1.6 units [95% CI, 0.9 to 2.3 units]) and physical function (mean difference, 9.3 units [CI, 5.9 t

195 ction, the longitudinal trajectories of each physical function measure were significantly associated

196 ue measured by the Chalder fatigue scale and physical function measured by the physical function subs

197 7 to 0.23 SD), fat mass (-0.65 to -0.75 kg), physical function measures (sit-to-stand, both 15%; 4-sq

198 unctional Status Score for the ICU and other physical function measures, and generally weaker correla

199 g correlations (69% of 32 > 0.40) with other physical function measures.

200 outcome measures covered physical symptoms, physical function, mental health, general function, cogn

201 were to evaluate the intervention effects on physical function, muscle strength, lean mass (LM), fat

202 ns and in interpreting studies comparing the physical function of groups of ICU patients.

203 he effects of PS on the body composition and physical function of older people undergoing RET.We perf

204 were defined: 1) postoperative delirium, 2) physical function on postoperative day 30, 3) fall risk

205 ous impact of the longitudinal trajectory of physical function on waiting list mortality (=death or d

206 ition, no differences were seen in objective physical function or depressive symptoms at 12 months in

207 iseases or major impairments in cognitive or physical function or mental health).

208 us bleeding risks to achieve improvements in physical functioning or reductions in heart failure hosp

209 ow testosterone to improve energy, vitality, physical function, or cognition (conditional recommendat

210 than 275 ng/mL and impaired sexual function, physical function, or vitality were allocated to testost

211 eve symptoms, including pain, and to improve physical function, or with oral acetaminophen to reduce

212 cific acupressure to reduce pain and improve physical function, or with transcutaneous electrical ner

213 values, for 6-minute-walk distance and SF-36 Physical Function outcome measures.

214 s associated with improved mental health and physical function over time.

215 tality (P < 0.001; 95% CI, 0.96-0.98), daily physical function (P < 0.001; 95% CI, 0.97-0.99), and pa

216 ohort also showed improved QOL in regards to physical function (P = 0.02) and general health (P = 0.0

217 cardiorespiratory fitness (P < .001), better physical functioning (P </= .001), less nausea and vomit

218 sity (P=0.02), and interference of pain with physical functioning (P=0.02) on discharge from the serv

219 93) in an independent sample, and related to physical functioning (p=5.9e-3), after adjusting for age

220 obal mental health (GMH) = 51.2 +/- 9.6, and physical functioning (PF) = 45.5 +/- 10.2 (general popul

221 sed diseases and completed the Short Form 36 physical functioning (PF) scale over multiple survey cyc

222 Physical functioning (PF; QLQ-C30) and eating problems (

223 h pretransplantation functional status data (physical function [PF] scale of the Medical Outcomes Stu

224 Form Health Survey (SF-36) domain scores for physical functioning, physical role functioning, bodily

225 a, and similar trajectories of cognitive and physical function prior to pneumonia (adjusted prevalenc

226 uation) system and included sexual function, physical function, quality of life, energy and vitality,

227 husetts General Hospital (MGH) Cognitive and Physical Functioning Questionnaire (CPFQ) showed a promi

228 comes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey physical functioning questionnaires were also administer

229 comes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey physical functioning questionnaires were also administer

230 For the field to be able to track physical functioning recovery, we need a measurement too

231 Impaired physical functioning reduces the quality of life in pati

232 nitive functioning but worse on 1 measure of physical functioning relative to children born full term

233 whether there are any additional benefits to physical function, remains uncertain.

234 Improvements in fatigue and physical functioning reported by participants originally

235 ined (within-group comparison of fatigue and physical functioning, respectively, at long-term follow-

236 -up period compared with 1 year (fatigue and physical functioning, respectively: APT -3.0 [-4.4 to -1

237 s of adding CR for weight loss on muscle and physical function responses to RT in older overweight an

238 ns were also found between weight change and physical function, role limitations due to physical prob

239 bscales (fatigue, nausea and vomiting, pain, physical functioning, role functioning, disease symptoms

240 7 only the association with physical domain (physical functioning, role limitations caused by physica

241 with higher scores in the RAND-36 scales of physical functioning, role limitations caused by physica

242 dy 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36): physical functioning; role limitations due to physical h

243 e, 1.1 [95% CI, 0.04 to 2.1, P = .04), SF-36 physical function scale score (difference, 12.2 [95% CI,

244 s (SF-36) for physical and mental health and physical function scale score, Functional Performance In

245 ssion Questionnaire (SDQ), the Cognitive and Physical Functioning Scale (CPFQ), the patient-rated ver

246 n 24 months after surgery, measured with the physical functioning scale of the European Organisation

247 s 64% (+/- 22%) and 67% (+/- 26%), and SF-36 Physical Function score (as percent-predicted) was 61% (

248 The baseline mean (SD) physical function score for the active group was 32.3 (9

249 Primary outcome was physical function score on the Short Form-36 Health Surv

250 o -2.3, p<0.0001; effect size 0.53) and mean physical function score was 55.7 (23.3) in the GES group

251 minute-walk distance, and Short Form [SF]-36 Physical Function score) for 203 survivors of ALI enroll

252 mary end points were trunk fat mass and SF36 Physical Functioning score (SF36-PF) at 26 weeks by inte

253 Mean WOMAC Physical Function scores decreased from 7.2 to 3.7 in th

254 of life was similar between groups, whereas physical functioning scores remained slightly lower in p

255 Secondary outcomes were objective physical function (Short Physical Performance Battery) a

256 Follow-up physical function (short physical performance battery; Z

257 athy Questionnaire (KCCQ) (23 items covering physical function, social function, symptoms, self-effic

258 fect of heart failure on patients' symptoms, physical function, social limitations, and QOL.

259 We assessed self-reported physical function status with the Health Assessment Ques

260 0.05, 0.57 and 0.53, respectively for WOMAC physical function subscale and 0.65, 0.99 and 0.12, resp

261 s, defined as a >/= 10-point decrease in the physical function subscale of the Medical Outcomes Short

262 scale and physical function measured by the physical function subscale of the SF-36.

263 ical function (assessed by the Short Form-36 physical function subscale); both were self-rated by pat

264 ge (CGIC), the change in 36-Item Short Form- physical functioning subscale score (SF-36), and the cha

265 n the deutetrabenazine group, the mean SF-36 physical functioning subscale scores decreased from 47.5

266 the SF-36 physical component summary and the physical functioning subscale) was significantly worse a

267 The results were consistent for WOMAC physical function subscore (between-group difference, -1

268 tem: pain (at <=2 hours and at 1 to 7 days), physical function, symptom relief, treatment satisfactio

269 Physical function tests (Physical Function in ICU Test-s

270 timore (N=255) and AT1RaAb associations with physical function tests and outcomes assessed.

271 effective in reducing fatigue and improving physical function than both adaptive pacing therapy (APT

272 e outcomes relevant to exercise training and physical function that should be evaluated in SOT.

273 umin, hepatocellular carcinoma, and baseline physical function, the longitudinal trajectories of each

274 ACE-R), National Adult Reading Test (NART)), physical functioning (Timed Get Up and Go (TUG), 9-Hole

275 hypothetical trial for breast cancer, using physical function to develop specific PRO research objec

276 n ICU Test-scored is one of four recommended physical functioning tools for use within the ICU; howev

277 ficantly between the two study groups in the Physical Function Trial but did differ significantly whe

278 three trials--the Sexual Function Trial, the Physical Function Trial, and the Vitality Trial.

279 provement in pain and a small improvement in physical function up to 6 weeks after injection.

280 ence that associations between cognitive and physical functioning varied over time.

281 Physical function was assessed with the Australia-modifi

282 Poor physical function was associated with stroke severity (T

283 The SF36 Physical function was found to be a suitable primary out

284 rting outcomes of muscle mass, strength, and physical function was performed.

285 In both groups, physical function was reduced yet significantly improved

286 e, higher income, more education, and higher physical functioning were independently associated with

287 alking (11-point numerical rating scale) and physical function (Western Ontario and McMaster Universi

288 essed on a numerical rating scale [NRS]) and physical function (Western Ontario and McMaster Universi

289 intensity (Visual analogue scale [VAS]) and physical function (Western Ontario and McMaster Universi

290 important difference [MCID], 1.8 units) and physical function (Western Ontario and McMaster Universi

291 m, no pain; 100 mm, worst pain possible) and physical function (Western Ontario and McMaster Universi

292 Treatment should target full return to physical function, which leads to subsequent improvement

293 face a high risk of muscle loss and impaired physical function, which may contribute to sarcopenic ob

294 factors that may prevent further decline in physical function with aging.

295 eletal muscle that may contribute to reduced physical function with knee OA-associated muscle disuse,

296 tioning and less evidence of associations of physical functioning with executive functioning and glob

297 ter physical functioning and associations of physical functioning with later cognition.

298 with Chalder fatigue questionnaire score and physical functioning with short form-36 subscale score,

299 speed and daily walking time as measures of physical function) without and with adjustment for infla

300 Average physical function worsened per 3 months on the waiting l