The influence of dog ownership on objective measures of free-living physical activity and sedentary behaviour in community-dwelling older adults : a longitudinal case-controlled study

Background: There is some evidence to suggest that dog ownership may improve physical activity (PA) among older adults, but to date, studies examining this, have either depended on self-report or incomplete datasets due to the type of activity monitor used to record physical activity. Additionally, the effect of dog ownership on sedentary behaviour (SB) has not been explored. The aim of the current study was to address these issues by using activPAL monitors to evaluate the influence of dog ownership on health enhancing PA and SB in a longitudinal study of independently-mobile, community-dwelling older adults. Methods: Study participants (43 pairs of dog owners and non-dog owners, matched on a range of demographic variables) wore an activPAL monitor continuously for three, one-week data collection periods over the course of a year. Participants also reported information about their own and their dog demographics, caring responsibilities, and completed a diary of wake times. Diary data was used to isolate waking times, and outcome measures of time spent walking, time spent walking at a moderate cadence (>100 steps/min), time spent standing, time spent sitting, number of sitting events (continuous periods of sitting), and the number of and of time spent sitting in prolonged events (>30 min). For each measure, a linear mixed effects model with dog ownership as a fixed effect, and a random effects structure of measurement point nested in participant nested in pair was used to assess the effect of dog ownership. Results: Owning a dog indicated a large, potentially health improving, average effect of 22 min additional time spent walking, 95%CI (12, 34), and 2760 additional steps per day, 95%CI (1667, 3991), with this additional walking undertaken at a moderate intensity cadence. Dog owners had significantly fewer sitting events. However, there were no significant differences between the groups for either the total time spent sitting, or the number or duration of prolonged sedentary events. Conclusions: The scale of the influence of dog ownership on PA found in this study, indicates that future research regarding PA in older adults should assess and report dog ownership and/or dog walking statu

Out of hours ophthalmic surgery:a UK national survey

AIMS: There have been significant changes in the management of out of hours services in ophthalmology recently. The European Working Time Directive (EWTD) and economic measures have anecdotally reduced the availability of staff and facilities outside normal working hours, and there have been various responses to the provision of emergency surgical care. There are disparate attitudes to the optimum management of the emergency surgical case. We sought to establish a nationwide picture of the management of out of hours surgery. METHODS: A questionnaire was distributed to every consultant ophthalmologist working in the NHS and registered with the Royal College of Ophthalmologists (n=947). Information was requested regarding departmental and personal policies, local facilities, and personal beliefs regarding emergency surgery. RESULTS: A total of 440 (46.5%) questionnaires were returned from 155 units; 18.7% of the units had no out of hours services or no operating facilities. Sixty-three percent of units reported a local policy regarding a time after which patients should not be taken to theatre. For 57%, this time began between 2100 hours and midnight. The most common reasons for not operating after a certain time were ‘belief that delay does not significantly affect the outcome' (41.6%), ‘delayed access to theatre due to competition with other surgical specialities' (40%), and ‘no specialist ophthalmic-theatre nursing input' (32.7%). CONCLUSION: We report the first nationwide study on out of hours ophthalmological surgical working practices. This demonstrates variation in work patterns. It is significant to patients and ophthalmologists that there should be units in United Kingdom without full local facilities and staff