Department of Family Medicine, Chi-Mei Medical Center, Tainan, Taiwan.
J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2012 Jul;13(6):517-21. doi: 10.1016/j.jamda.2012.02.002. Epub 2012 Mar 28.
To determine prognostic value of handgrip strength (HGS) and walking speed (WS) in predicting the cause-specific mortality for older men.
Prospective cohort study.
Banciao Veterans Care Home.
558 residents aged 75 years and older.
Anthropometric data, lifestyle factors, comorbid conditions, biomarkers, HGS, and WS at recruitment; all-cause and cause-specific mortality at 3 years after recruitment.
During the study period, 99 participants died and the baseline HGS and WS were significantly lower than survivors (P both <.001). Cox survival analysis showed that subjects with slowest quartile of WS were at significantly higher risk of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality (hazard ratio [HR] 3.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.69-7.43; HR 11.55, 95% CI 2.30-58.04, respectively), whereas the lowest quartile of HGS significantly predicted a higher risk of infection-related death (HR 5.53, 95% CI 1.09-28.09). Participants in the high-risk status with slowest quartile for WS but not those in the high-risk status with weakest quartile for HGS had similar high risk of all-cause mortality with the group with combined high-risk status (HR 2.96, 95% CI 1.68-5.23; HR 2.58, 95% CI 1.45-4.60, respectively) compared with the participants without high-risk status (reference group).
Slow WS predicted all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, whereas weak HGS predicted a higher risk of infection-related death among elderly, institutionalized men in Taiwan. Combining HGS with WS simultaneously had no better prognostic value than using WS only in predicting all-cause mortality.
确定握力(HGS)和步行速度(WS)对预测老年男性特定原因死亡率的预后价值。
前瞻性队列研究。
板桥荣民之家。
558 名年龄在 75 岁及以上的居民。
招募时的人体测量数据、生活方式因素、合并症、生物标志物、HGS 和 WS;招募后 3 年内的全因和特定原因死亡率。
在研究期间,有 99 名参与者死亡,基线 HGS 和 WS 明显低于幸存者(P 均<.001)。Cox 生存分析显示,WS 最慢四分位的受试者全因死亡率和心血管死亡率的风险显著升高(危险比 [HR] 3.55,95%置信区间 [CI] 1.69-7.43;HR 11.55,95%CI 2.30-58.04),而 HGS 的最低四分位则显著预测感染相关死亡的风险更高(HR 5.53,95%CI 1.09-28.09)。在 WS 最慢四分位且 HGS 最弱四分位均处于高风险状态的受试者中,其全因死亡率的风险与同时具有两种高风险状态的组相似(HR 2.96,95%CI 1.68-5.23;HR 2.58,95%CI 1.45-4.60)与没有高风险状态的参与者(参照组)相比。
WS 缓慢预测全因和心血管死亡率,而 HGS 较弱预测台湾老年、机构化男性感染相关死亡的风险更高。与仅使用 WS 相比,同时使用 HGS 和 WS 预测全因死亡率没有更好的预后价值。