Health is a multi-dimensional concept, capturing how people feel and function. The broad concept of Active and Healthy Ageing was proposed by the World Health Organisation (WHO) as the process of optimizing opportunities for health to enhance quality of life as people age. It applies to both individuals and population groups. A universal Active and Healthy Ageing definition is not available and it may differ depending on the purpose of the definition and/or the questions raised. While the European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing (EIP on AHA) has had a major impact, a definition of Active and Healthy Ageing is urgently needed. A meeting was organised in Montpellier, France, October 20-21, 2014 as the annual conference of the EIP on AHA Reference Site MACVIA-LR (Contre les Maladies Chroniques pour un Vieillissement Actif en Languedoc Roussillon) to propose an operational definition of Active and Healthy Ageing including tools that may be used for this. The current paper describes the rationale and the process by which the aims of the meeting will be reached.

No abstract

A core operational definition of active and healthy aging (AHA) is needed to conduct comparisons. A conceptual AHA framework proposed by the European Innovation Partnership on Active and Healthy Ageing Reference Site Network includes several items such as functioning (individual capability and underlying body systems), well-being, activities and participation, and diseases (including noncommunicable diseases, frailty, mental and oral health disorders). The instruments proposed to assess the conceptual framework of AHA have common applicability and availability attributes. The approach includes core and optional domains/instruments depending on the needs and the questions. A major common domain is function, as measured by the World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0). WHODAS 2.0 can be used across all diseases and healthy individuals. It covers many of the AHA dimensions proposed by the Reference Site network. However, WHODAS 2.0 does not include all dimensions proposed for AHA assessment. The second common domain is health-related quality of life (HRQoL). A report of the AHA questionnaire in the form of a spider net has been proposed to facilitate usual comparisons across individuals and groups of interest.

Introduction Tracheoesophageal speech is considered the gold standard for rehabilitation following total laryngectomy. One of the main problems of voice prosthesis is the periprosthesis leakage. Provox Vega XtraSeal incorporates a double flange on the pharyngeal side of the prosthesis in order to avoid these failures. The aim of the study is to compare the device lifetime between the Provox Vega and Provox Vega XtraSeal and to examine possible related factors that influence their duration. Methods Prospective case‐crossover study in 20 laryngectomised patients with Provox Vega and periprothesis leakage to whom a Provox Vega XtraSeal was placed. Survival and possible factors that affect voice prosthesis were studied using Kaplan‐Meier curves and Cox Proportional Hazards Regression with Schoenfeld residuals to test the possible assumptions. Results A total of 230 prostheses were evaluated. The most frequent reason for replacement was due to an endoprosthesis leakage (n = 146, 67%) in both models. Mean lifetime of Provox Vega was 104.474 ± 7.29 days (CI 95% 90.19‐118.76) and of Provox XtraSeal was 176.76 ± 26.46 days (CI 95% 124.9‐228.61) (P = .012). Complementary treatment with radiotherapy demonstrated a higher device survival (P = .007). Discussion Provox XtraSeal seems to be effective reducing the number of changes due to periprosthetic leakage, thus increasing the survival of voice prosthesis.

An important reduction in self-reported exposure to environmental tobacco smoke occurred in Galicia in the period 2005-2011, specially after the introduction of Laws 28/2005 and 42/2010. Nevertheless, one in four of the population aged 16 to 74 remained exposed in 2011.