Chung Jui-Yuan, Hwang Hei-Fen, Suprawesta Lalu, Lin Mau-Roung
Institute of Injury Prevention and Control, College of Public Health, Taipei Medical University, 250 Wu-Hsing Street, Taipei, 11031, Taiwan, ROC.
Department of Emergency Medicine, Cathay General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan, ROC.
BMC Geriatr. 2025 Apr 10;25(1):245. doi: 10.1186/s12877-025-05874-0.
Several cognitive-frailty (CF) measurements, such as traditional CF, the CF phenotype, physio-cognitive decline syndrome (PCDS), and motoric cognitive risk syndrome (MCRS) have been developed but their predictive abilities for incident dementia and incident disability are seldom compared. We conducted a 2-year prospective study to compare the associations of traditional CF, the CF phenotype, PCDS, and MCRS with incident dementia and incident disability.
In total, 755 individuals aged 65 years or older, without preexisting dementia or disability, participated in the baseline assessment and were subsequently monitored over a 2-year period. Data on cognitive and frailty components of traditional CF, the CF phenotype, PCDS, and MCRS, were collected. The logistic regression model was used to investigate independent associations of each CF measure with incident dementia and incident disability.
In total, 505 participants completed the two annual follow-ups. After adjusting for other CF measures, age, and sex, incident dementia was significantly associated with PCDS (odds ratio [OR] = 2.54; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.25 ~ 5.19) but was not significantly associated with traditional CF, the CF phenotype, or MCRS, and incident disability was significantly associated with the CF phenotype (OR = 2.90; 95% CI, 1.59 ~ 5.30) but was not significantly associated with traditional CF, PCDS, or MCRS. After adjusting for other CF measures, age, sex, educational level, and other variables, incident dementia was not independently associated with any CF measure, while the association of incident disability with the CF phenotype remained significant (OR = 2.72; 95% CI, 1.45 ~ 5.11).
The CF phenotype, MCRS, and PCDS can possibly identify a higher number of CF cases than can the traditional CF measure. While the CF phenotype was a significant predictor of incident disability, all four CF measures lacked an independent association with incident dementia over a 2-year period. Future studies with a longer study period are needed to validate our results.
已经开发了几种认知衰弱（CF）测量方法，如传统CF、CF表型、生理认知衰退综合征（PCDS）和运动认知风险综合征（MCRS），但很少比较它们对新发痴呆和新发残疾的预测能力。我们进行了一项为期2年的前瞻性研究，以比较传统CF、CF表型、PCDS和MCRS与新发痴呆和新发残疾之间的关联。
共有755名65岁及以上、无既往痴呆或残疾的个体参加了基线评估，随后在2年期间进行监测。收集了传统CF、CF表型、PCDS和MCRS的认知和衰弱成分数据。采用逻辑回归模型研究每种CF测量方法与新发痴呆和新发残疾的独立关联。
共有505名参与者完成了两年的年度随访。在调整了其他CF测量方法、年龄和性别后，新发痴呆与PCDS显著相关（优势比[OR]=2.54；95%置信区间[CI]，1.255.19），但与传统CF、CF表型或MCRS无显著关联，新发残疾与CF表型显著相关（OR=2.90；95%CI，1.595.30），但与传统CF、PCDS或MCRS无显著关联。在调整了其他CF测量方法、年龄、性别、教育水平和其他变量后，新发痴呆与任何CF测量方法均无独立关联，而新发残疾与CF表型的关联仍然显著（OR=2.72；95%CI，1.45~5.11）。
CF表型、MCRS和PCDS可能比传统CF测量方法识别出更多的CF病例。虽然CF表型是新发残疾的重要预测指标，但在2年期间，所有四种CF测量方法与新发痴呆均无独立关联。需要进行更长研究期的未来研究来验证我们的结果。
