The Texas State Donated Skeletal Collection at the Forensic Anthropology Center at Texas State

The Forensic Anthropology Center at Texas State (FACTS) began accepting whole-body donations for scientific research and educational purposes under the Texas Anatomical Gift Act in 2008. Research conducted with donated whole bodies involves studies in taphonomy and human decomposition, including reconstructing the postmortem interval. Following decomposition, the skeletal elements of all donors are collected, cleaned, and permanently curated into the Texas State Donated Skeletal Collection (TXSTDSC), which is used for teaching and research by faculty and students at Texas State but is also open to external researchers. To date, FACTS has received 710 donors. Fifty-eight percent of donors are male and 42% are female. Donor ages range from 21 weeks’ gestation to 103 years old at the time of death, with a mean of 66 years, and a median of 68 years. Based on self-identified or family-identified ancestry, 90% of donors are White, 4.5% are Hispanic, 3% are Black, less than 2% are of mixed ancestry, and less than 1% are Asian or Native American. Information collected about each donor includes geographic/residential history; occupational history; socioeconomic status; anthropometrics; parity status; alcohol, tobacco, and drug use history; mobility status; an overall health questionnaire; cause and manner of death.

Pre-fracture Mobility Using Standardized Scale as an Early Indicator of High Health Risk in Patients with a Hip Fracture

Hip fracture in older adults is associated with poor prognosis. We tested the hypothesis that a single standardized measure, pre-fracture mobility, can be used as an early indicator of patients at high health risk after a hip fracture. Analysis of prospectively collected data of older adults admitted with a hip fracture between April-2009 and June-2019 in a single NHS hospital, UK. Pre-fracture mobility status (freely mobile, mobilising outdoors with one aid or with two aids, and limited to indoors), was used to predict length of stay (LOS) and mortality in hospital, and discharge destination. Among 3073 (2231 women, 842 men) admitted from their own home (mean ± SD age = 82.7 ± 9.3 yr), 159 died and 2914 survived to discharge: 1834 back to their home, 772 to rehabilitation, 66 to residential care, 141 to nursing care and 101 to unknown destinations. Compared with LOS of 15.9 ± 15.6 days in patients who mobilised freely before fracture (reference), those who were able to mobilise outdoors with one aid stayed 3.5 days, and those with two aids or confined to indoor mobility stayed one week longer in hospital. In-patient mortality was increased among patients who mobilised outdoors with two aids: OR = 2.1 (95%CI = 1.3–3.3), and those limited to indoors: OR = 2.1 (1.3–1.5). Finally, a change in residence on discharge was more likely in those who mobilised outdoors with two aids (OR = 1.8, 95%CI = 1.2–2.6), and those limited to indoors (OR = 1.9, 95%CI = 1.2–2.9). In conclusion, pre-fracture mobility may be a useful early indicator for identifying patients at increased risk of adverse outcomes after an acute hip fracture.

The Borderwork of Humanitarianism During Displacement from War-Torn Syria

This chapter attempts to add nuance to the scholarly debate on the security politics of borders and invites its readers to consider the practices and identities of refugees, host border societies, and earlier border migrants in a way that considers their pre-crisis (im)mobility status within the hybrid human realm of the border. The vacillating status of earning a living across the border in times of peace pervades the space of local citizenship during displacement. Against this backdrop, a clear-cut humanitarianism along borders—purporting to distinguish who is the host and who is the guest—acts as a force intended to preserve nation-state privileges. This vacillating status between borders represents the local citizens’ desire that the refugees return home as soon as possible; the refugees, in turn, are left to deal with the paradox of this request, as they are unable to definitively choose either site. It is in this vein that this chapter engages with ungraspable categories of life—and humanitarian labels—pushing border-crossing beyond a matter of life or death, and draws on the taxonomies that humanitarian borderwork and national border policies engender.

Frequency of Physical Therapist Intervention Is Associated With Mobility Status and Disposition at Hospital Discharge for Patients With COVID-19

Objective For patients diagnosed with the novel coronavirus, COVID-19, evidence is needed to understand the effect of treatment by physical therapists in the acute hospital on patient outcomes. The primary aims of this study were to examine the relationship of physical therapy visit frequency and duration in the hospital with patients’ mobility status at discharge and probability of discharging home. Methods This retrospective study included patients with COVID-19 admitted to any of 11 hospitals in 1 health system. The primary outcome was mobility status at discharge, measured using the Activity Measure for Post-Acute Care 6-Clicks basic mobility (6-Clicks mobility) and the Johns Hopkins Highest Level of Mobility scales. Discharge to home versus to a facility was a secondary outcome. Associations between these outcomes and physical therapy visit frequency or mean duration were tested using multiple linear or modified Poisson regression. Potential moderation of these relationships by particular patient characteristics was examined using interaction terms in subsequent regression models. Results For the 312 patients included, increased physical therapy visit frequency was associated with higher 6-Clicks mobility (b = 3.63; 95% CI, 1.54–5.71) and Johns Hopkins Highest Level of Mobility scores (b = 1.15; 95% CI, 0.37–1.93) at hospital discharge and with increased probability of discharging home (adjusted relative risk = 1.82; 95% CI, 1.25–2.63). Longer mean visit duration was also associated with improved mobility at discharge and the probability of discharging home, though the effects were less pronounced. Few moderation effects were observed. Conclusion Patients with COVID-19 demonstrated improved mobility at hospital discharge and higher probability of discharging home with increased frequency and longer mean duration of physical therapy visits. These associations were not generally moderated by patient characteristics. Impact Physical therapy should be an integral component of care for patients hospitalized due to COVID-19. Providing sufficient physical therapist interventions to improve outcomes must be balanced against protection from viral spread. Lay Summary Patients with COVID-19 can benefit from more frequent and longer physical therapy visits in the hospital.

Formative Evaluation of Consumer-Grade Activity Monitors Worn by Older Adults: Test-Retest Reliability and Criterion Validity of Step Counts

Background To assess whether commercial-grade activity monitors are appropriate for measuring step counts in older adults, it is essential to evaluate their measurement properties in this population. Objective This study aimed to evaluate test-retest reliability and criterion validity of step counting in older adults with self-reported intact and limited mobility from 6 commercial-grade activity monitors: Fitbit Charge, Fitbit One, Garmin vívofit 2, Jawbone UP2, Misfit Shine, and New-Lifestyles NL-1000. Methods For test-retest reliability, participants completed two 100-step overground walks at a usual pace while wearing all monitors. We tested the effects of the activity monitor and mobility status on the absolute difference in step count error (%) and computed the standard error of measurement (SEM) between repeat trials. To assess criterion validity, participants completed two 400-meter overground walks at a usual pace while wearing all monitors. The first walk was continuous; the second walk incorporated interruptions to mimic the conditions of daily walking. Criterion step counts were from the researcher tally count. We estimated the effects of the activity monitor, mobility status, and walk interruptions on step count error (%). We also generated Bland-Altman plots and conducted equivalence tests. Results A total of 36 individuals participated (n=20 intact mobility and n=16 limited mobility; 19/36, 53% female) with a mean age of 71.4 (SD 4.7) years and BMI of 29.4 (SD 5.9) kg/m2. Considering test-retest reliability, there was an effect of the activity monitor (P<.001). The Fitbit One (1.0%, 95% CI 0.6% to 1.3%), the New-Lifestyles NL-1000 (2.6%, 95% CI 1.3% to 3.9%), and the Garmin vívofit 2 (6.0%, 95 CI 3.2% to 8.8%) had the smallest mean absolute differences in step count errors. The SEM values ranged from 1.0% (Fitbit One) to 23.5% (Jawbone UP2). Regarding criterion validity, all monitors undercounted the steps. Step count error was affected by the activity monitor (P<.001) and walk interruptions (P=.02). Three monitors had small mean step count errors: Misfit Shine (−1.3%, 95% CI −19.5% to 16.8%), Fitbit One (−2.1%, 95% CI −6.1% to 2.0%), and New-Lifestyles NL-1000 (−4.3%, 95 CI −18.9% to 10.3%). Mean step count error was larger during interrupted walking than continuous walking (−5.5% vs −3.6%; P=.02). Bland-Altman plots illustrated nonsystematic bias and small limits of agreement for Fitbit One and Jawbone UP2. Mean step count error lay within an equivalence bound of ±5% for Fitbit One (P<.001) and Misfit Shine (P=.001). Conclusions Test-retest reliability and criterion validity of step counting varied across 6 consumer-grade activity monitors worn by older adults with self-reported intact and limited mobility. Walk interruptions increased the step count error for all monitors, whereas mobility status did not affect the step count error. The hip-worn Fitbit One was the only monitor with high test-retest reliability and criterion validity.