Boeckxstaens Pauline, Vaes Bert, Legrand Delphine, Dalleur Olivia, De Sutter An, Degryse Jean-Marie
Department of Family Medicine and Primary Health Care, Ghent University (UG) , Belgium.
Eur J Gen Pract. 2015 Mar;21(1):39-44. doi: 10.3109/13814788.2014.914167. Epub 2014 Jul 1.
Ageing people show increasing morbidity, dependence and vulnerability.
To compare the relationships of different measures of multimorbidity with dependence (operationalized as disability) and vulnerability (operationalized as frailty).
A cross-sectional analysis within the BELFRAIL cohort (567 subjects aged ≥ 80). Multimorbidity was measured using a disease count (DC), the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) and the cumulative illness rating scale (CIRS), respectively. Associations with disability (based on activities of daily living) and frailty (defined by the Fried frailty criteria) were assessed using bivariable and multivariable analyses. Net reclassification improvement (NRI) values were calculated to compare the abilities of the DC, CCI and CIRS to identify patients with disability or frailty.
Disability was associated with the DC (crude odds ratio, OR: 2.1; 95% confidence interval, CI: 1.4-3.4), CCI (crude OR: 1.8; 95% CI: 1.2-2.7) and CIRS (crude OR: 4.0; 95% CI: 2.5-6.5); only the association with CIRS was independent of age, sex, chronic inflammation, impaired cognition and frailty (adjusted OR: 3.2; 95% CI: 1.7-5.8). Frailty was associated with CCI (crude OR: 2.4; 95% CI: 1.2-4.6) and CIRS (crude OR: 2.6; 95% CI: 1.3-5.3); adjusted for age, sex, chronic inflammation, impaired cognition and disability. These associations were not statistically significant. The NRIs demonstrated a similar ability of the DC, CCI, and CIRS to identify patients with disability or frailty, respectively.
The associations of different measures of multimorbidity with disability and frailty differ but their ability to identify patients with disability or frailty is similar. Generally, multimorbidity scores incompletely reflect dependence and vulnerability in this age group.
老年人的发病率、依赖性和脆弱性日益增加。
比较多种疾病的不同测量方法与依赖性(以残疾衡量)和脆弱性(以衰弱衡量)之间的关系。
对BELFRAIL队列(567名年龄≥80岁的受试者)进行横断面分析。分别使用疾病计数(DC)、查尔森合并症指数(CCI)和累积疾病评定量表(CIRS)来测量多种疾病。使用双变量和多变量分析评估与残疾(基于日常生活活动)和衰弱(根据弗里德衰弱标准定义)的关联。计算净重新分类改善(NRI)值,以比较DC、CCI和CIRS识别残疾或衰弱患者的能力。
残疾与DC(粗比值比,OR:2.1;95%置信区间,CI:1.4 - 3.4)、CCI(粗OR:1.8;95% CI:1.2 - 2.7)和CIRS(粗OR:4.0;95% CI:2.5 - 6.5)相关;仅与CIRS的关联独立于年龄、性别慢性炎症、认知障碍和衰弱(调整后OR:3.2;95% CI:1.7 - 5.8)。衰弱与CCI(粗OR:2.4;95% CI:1.2 - 4.6)和CIRS(粗OR:2.6;95% CI:1.3 - 5.3)相关;经年龄、性别、慢性炎症、认知障碍和残疾调整。这些关联无统计学意义。NRI表明DC、CCI和CIRS分别识别残疾或衰弱患者的能力相似。
多种疾病的不同测量方法与残疾和衰弱的关联不同,但其识别残疾或衰弱患者的能力相似。一般来说,多种疾病评分不能完全反映该年龄组的依赖性和脆弱性。