School of Medicine, Tongji University, 1239 Siping Road, Shanghai, 200092, China.
School of Medicine, Shanghai YangZhi Rehabilitation Hospital (Shanghai Sunshine Rehabilitation Center), Tongji University, Shanghai, 200092, China.
BMC Geriatr. 2023 Mar 18;23(1):150. doi: 10.1186/s12877-023-03759-8.
Frailty is associated with mortality among older adults. We aimed to determine the appropriate time and frailty index (FI) threshold for frailty intervention in Chinese community-dwelling older adults.
In this prospective cohort study, we used data from the 2011 wave of the Chinese Longitudinal Healthy Longevity Study. Follow-up was performed for seven years from baseline. Using the FI to evaluate frailty and define frailty status, we explored the best time point and FI score for frailty intervention, by comparing the relationships of FI and frailty status with mortality.
From 2011 to 2018, 8642 participants were included and followed-up. A total of 4458 participants died during the study period. After adjusting for variables such as age, sex, marital status, education level, and living conditions, the hazard ratio (HR) of mortality risk based on the FI at baseline was 37.484 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 30.217-46.498; P < 0.001); female sex, living in the city, being married, and living with spouse were found to be protective factors, whereas ageing was a risk factor for frailty. The mortality risk was higher in pre-frail than in frail participants (HR: 3.588, 95% CI: 3.212-4.009, P < 0.001). Piecewise linear regression analysis revealed an FI score threshold of 0.5. When the FI score was > 0.5, the HR of mortality based on the FI was 15.758 (95% CI: 3.656-67.924; P < 0.001); when the FI score was ≤ 0.5, the HR of mortality based on the FI was 48.944 (95% CI: 36.162-66.244; P < 0.001).
Using FI as a continuous variable to predict death is more accurate than frailty status. The advancement of early interventions for mortality risk reduction is more beneficial in pre-frail than in frail patients, and an FI score of 0.5 was found to be the threshold for mortality prediction using the FI.
衰弱与老年人的死亡率有关。我们旨在确定中国社区居住的老年人进行衰弱干预的适当时间和衰弱指数(FI)阈值。
在这项前瞻性队列研究中,我们使用了中国长寿纵向研究 2011 年波的数据。从基线开始进行了七年的随访。使用 FI 评估衰弱并定义衰弱状态,通过比较 FI 和衰弱状态与死亡率的关系,探讨了衰弱干预的最佳时间点和 FI 评分。
2011 年至 2018 年,纳入并随访了 8642 名参与者。在研究期间共有 4458 名参与者死亡。在校正年龄、性别、婚姻状况、教育水平和生活条件等变量后,FI 基线时的死亡率风险的危险比(HR)为 37.484(95%置信区间[CI]:30.217-46.498;P<0.001);女性、居住在城市、已婚和与配偶同住被认为是保护因素,而年龄增长是衰弱的一个风险因素。与虚弱参与者相比,虚弱前期参与者的死亡率风险更高(HR:3.588,95%CI:3.212-4.009,P<0.001)。分段线性回归分析显示 FI 评分阈值为 0.5。当 FI 评分>0.5 时,基于 FI 的死亡率 HR 为 15.758(95%CI:3.656-67.924;P<0.001);当 FI 评分≤0.5 时,基于 FI 的死亡率 HR 为 48.944(95%CI:36.162-66.244;P<0.001)。
使用 FI 作为连续变量预测死亡比衰弱状态更准确。在衰弱前期进行早期干预以降低死亡率风险的进展更为有益,并且发现 FI 评分为 0.5 是使用 FI 预测死亡率的阈值。