STATE OF MOTOR PERFORMANCE OF SLOVAK ELDERLY WOMEN

Functional fi tness and appropriate level of motor performance is a major determinant of quality of life and one of the key predictors of many health outcomes in later life. The purpose of the study was to measure individual performances in different motor abilities in elderly women and compare their average value of achieved performance with existing norms from different age category point of view. From the Senior Fitness Test battery (Rikli, & Jones, 2001) that consists of six performance-based tasks validate to measure functional fi tness components we picked up 3 of them (back scratch test, 8-foot up-and-go test and chair stand test). For further measurements we chose 3 additional tests like modifi ed sit and reach test, test of lateral spine fl exion and one leg stand test. 129 elderly women in age from 60 to 89 years participated in our research. We divided respondents into fi ve age categories where we provided comparison of average value of achieved motor performance in selected tests with existing norms. Women of all examined age categories (60-64, 65-69, 70-74, 75-79 and 80-89 years) achieved average level of motor abilities in all measured test except in chair stand test, where three age categories of Slovak elderly women (60-64, 65-69 and 70-74 years) showed even above-average level of lower limbs strength. In all tested motor abilities active elderly women presented higher level of motor performance comparing sedentary elderly women. On the basis of our results we can confi rm, that Slovak elderly women have an appropriate level of their motor performance, where better results were found in-group of active elderly women. By providing different tests we are not recommending one leg stand test for elderly who are older than 85 years of age.


INTRODUCTION
Scientifi c researches proved indeed that physical activity is of major importance in preventing premature ageing, maintaining functional independence, decreasing the risk factor of primary and secondary disabilities and increasing life-long well being.Regular physical activity has powerful positive effects on both physical and psychological health.Conversely, physical inactivity has a high human cost in terms of health.Loss of fl exibility impairs most functions needed for good mobility, including bending, stooping lifting, reaching, walking, and stairs climbing (Kaptein, Gignac, & Badley, 2009; Cress, et al, 2005).Maintaining lower-body fl exibility, especially in the hip joint and hamstrings, is also important because of its role in preventing low back pain, musculoskeletal injury, gain abnormalities, and in reducing the risk of falling (American College of Sport Medicine, 1995; Ross, Bohannon, Davis, & Gurchiek, 1999).In the upper body (shoulder area), adequate range of motion is needed for a number of specifi c functions such as combing one's hair, zipping a back zipper, putting on, or reaching for a seat belt.Reduced range of motion in the shoulder girdle also can result in pain and postural instability (Macedo, & Magee, 2008) and has been found to cause signifi cant disability in as much as 30% of the healthy adult population over 65 (Chakravarty, & Webley, 1993 Lower-body strength is needed for activities such as climbing stairs, walking distances, or getting out of a chair or bathtub.Combine agility and dynamic balance is also important for a number of common mobility tasks that require quick manoeuvring such as getting on and off a bus in a timely manner, moving out of the way to avoid getting hit by car and etc. Maintaining strength, muscle function, agility and balance is important because of the role it plays in helping to reduce the risk of falls and fallrelated injuries and because of its positive effect on a number of age-related healths conditions (Nemcek, 2009).It shortens the life expectancy, decreases quality of life, and limits functional independence.Appropriate level of motor abilities in elderly can make their life happier and richer but fi rst of all can bring to them healthy life-long well-being (Wittmannova, 2006;Bendikova, 2007).

METHODS
In the article we are comparing average value of achieved performance in different motor abilities in elderly women with existing norms from different age category point of view following two different authors (Rikli, & Jones, 2001;Nemcek, 2010).129 elderly women in age from 60 to 89 years participated in our research (table 1).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Results show that elderly women (G) of all age categories achieved in majority number satisfactory level of measured motor abilities, when their average value of performances in more evaluated tests fulfi lled required norm.
From general evaluation of motor performance point of view we register the highest level in chair stand test, which measures the lower limbs strength.There three age category of elderly women (60-64, 65-69, 70-74 years) achieved above-average level of performance (table 2).Furthermore our results show the numbers of elderly women in selected levels of performance (tables 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8).
In sit and reach test, which is measuring frontal spine fl exibility, achieved in all age categories absolute majority of elderly women the average level of their performance.The highest number with average level of fl exibility presented elderly women in age range 75-79 years (81%) as well as elderly women of the youngest age category (79%) who also showed the lowest below-average level (5%).On the other hand the lowest number (67%) of elderly women who achieved average level of frontal spine fl exibility were in age category 70-74 years, who also in the highest number presented below-average level of fl exibility (23%).Interesting was fi nding, that the oldest age category of elderly women presented best level of frontal spine fl exion when the highest number of women (20%) showed above-average level of this motor ability (table 3).Similarly, in lateral spine fl exion test measuring the level of lateral spine fl exibility in all age categories achieved absolute majority of elderly women the average level of their performance (table 4).Approximately same number of elderly women (from 62% to 65%) of each age category achieved the average level of lateral spine fl exibility, only women in age range 75-79 years presented more higher level of this motor ability, when the average level achieved only 55% but above-average level reached 36% of them.Similarly younger elderly women in age category 70-74 years showed relatively high level of later spine fl exion when only small number of women (5%) came under the below level of evaluation of particular motor ability.Interesting were performance of the youngest age category (60-64 years old) of women when they presented the lowest achieved level of lateral spine fl exibility evaluation (21%) from all assessed age categories of elderly women (table 4).
The highest number of elderly women in all measured age groups achieved the average level of shoulder fl exibility (tested by back scratch test), except the oldest age category of women (80-89 years old), who in the same number reached above-average level of their performance in back scratch test (36%).Take into consideration the performance numbers of average and above-average level we see that the highest level of shoulder fl exibility achieved elderly women in two age categories 70-74 years old women in number of 90% and 65-69 years old women in number of 89%.Other three groups of elderly women showed a little bit lower level of shoulder fl exibility (something around 17%), when summation of women percentage with achieved average and aboveaverage level was in range from 72% (80-89 years old) to 74% (60-64 years old) (table 5).Looking at the table 6 we see, that the highest level of static balance represented in one leg stand test elderly women of the youngest age category (60-64 years old) who could keep the balance on one preferred leg whole minute as well as the highest percentage of these ladies (69%) showed the average level of this motor ability from all monitored age categories of elderly women.At the same time elderly women from the youngest age category (31%) presented only below-average.On the other side the oldest age category of elderly women showed at the same time the lowest level of static balance, when 64% women couldn't keep the balance on one preferred leg neither 5 seconds long.We have to say, that 57% of these ladies were in age range 85-89 years.On the basis of this fi nding we do not recommend to provide this test for elderly over the age 85 years.As we can see further from table 6, the second lowest level we register in age category of 70-74 years old women, when almost half number of them (46%) presented only below average of static balance.Similarly it was showed in their older colleagues (75-79 years old) who presented the lowest level of particular motor ability (44%).The elderly women of two fi rst age categories (60-64 and 65-69 years old) presented above-average level of lower limbs strength with the highest number of women (67% and 60%) who achieved an excellent performance in chair stand test (table 7).When we look at the number of elderly women who couldn't achieve even the average level of lower limbs strength performance, we found out that the highest number (34%) of those women were included in age category of 75-79 years.The highest number (60%) of the oldest age category (80-89 years old) of women was found into average level of lower limbs strength performance.In general we can say, that the highest level of lower limbs strength achieved the category of the youngest elderly women, when they all fulfi lled norm (100%).On the second place were their younger colleagues (65-69 years old) in num-ber of 96% and on the third place the group of 70-74 years old women in number of 95%.Also the oldest group of elderly women (80-89 years old) could fulfi l the norm in 90% against their younger colleagues (75-79 years old) who fi lled norm only in 66 percentages.We can see, that the strength of lower limbs is compared with group of Rikli, & Jones (2001) group of women.When we look at the results in different age groups and different levels of performance we see, that above-average level of motor abilities in 8-foot up-and-go test achieved elderly women in age range 65-69 years in 48% and on the other side the lowest number of women with above-average level of performance were in age category 70-74 years (18%).If we evaluate the number of women who could fulfi l determined norm, then we see, that on the fi rst place were the youngest elderly women (60-64 years old) in number of 96%, then older women (65-69 years old) in number of 92% and on the third place older women in age 70-74 years (90%).The highest number of women whose level of agility and dynamic balance were under the determined norm was among in two last age categories.75-79 years old women represented below-average level of measured motor abilities in 44% and elderly women in age range 80-89 years couldn't fulfi l the norm in 55% (table 8).

Table 1 .
Group of women (G) by age (number of respondents)

N AGE (years) 60-64 65-69 70-74 75-79 80-89 129 35
For fl exibility measurement we used three functional tests: modifi ed sit and reach test, test of lateral spine fl exion and back scratch test.For balance evaluation we used one leg stand test and 8-foot up-and-go test and measuring strength we used chair stand test.Achieved performance in selected three functional tests (back scratch test, 8-foot up-and-go test and chair stand test) we are comparing with norms established by Rikli and Jones (2001) and performance in other three functional tests (modifi ed sit and reach test, test of lateral spine fl exion and one leg stand test) we are comparing with norms established by Nemcek (2010).For comparison by participation in physical activity (active vs. inactive) and by age (up to 69 vs. 70+ years of age) we used t-test (test for independent samples).

Table 3 .
The level of frontal spine fl exibility (percentage of elderly women)

Table 4 .
The level of lateral spine fl exibility (percentage of elderly women)

Table 5 .
The level of shoulder fl exibility (percentage of elderly women)

Table 6 .
The level of static balance (percentage of elderly women)

Table 7 .
The level of lower limbs strength (percentage of elderly women)

Table 8 .
The level of agility and dynamic balance (percentage of elderly women)