机构:[1]Neurobiology, Beijing Institute of Geriatrics[2]Geriatrics, Beijing Institute of Geriatrics, Xuanwu Hospital of Capital Medical University老年医学科首都医科大学宣武医院[3]Parkinson’s Disease Center, Beijing Institute for Brain Disorders[4]Key Laboratory on Neurodegenerative Disease, Ministry of Education[5]Beijing Key Laboratory for Parkinson’s Disease[6]Evidence-Based Medicine Center, Xuanwu Hospital of Capital Medical University首都医科大学宣武医院[7]Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Chronic and Noncommunicable Disease Control and Prevention[8]Neurology, Beijing Institute of Geriatrics, Xuanwu Hospital of Capital Medical University, Beijing, China神经内科老年医学科首都医科大学宣武医院
OBJECTIVES: To estimate the prevalence and incidence of frailty and evaluate the effect of frailty on adverse outcomes in Chinese elderly adults. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of prospective cohort study. SETTING: Community in Beijing, China. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals aged 55 and older (N = 10,039). MEASUREMENTS: A Frailty Index (FI) was derived from 34 items using Rockwood's cumulative deficits method. A FI of 0.25 or greater indicated frailty. The clinical outcome was evaluated using a composite variable of any of the following adverse events: falls, hospitalization, activity of daily living disability, and death. RESULTS: The overall crude prevalence of frailty was 12.3% (95% confidence interval (CI) = 11.7-13.0%), and the standardized prevalence was 9.1% (95% CI = 8.6-9.7%). The crude incidence was 13.0% (95% CI = 12.2-13.9%), and the standardized incidence 10.8% (95% CI = 10.0-11.6%). Prevalence and incidence were significantly greater with age (P for trend<.001) and greater in women (P<.001) and urban residents (P<.001). Participants with lower education and having three or more diseases and taking four or more medications daily were more likely to develop frailty over follow-up (all P<.05). After adjusting for age, number of diseases, and smoking at baseline, the risk of any adverse event in 1 year in the frail group was 58% higher than in the nonfrail group (adjusted odds ratio = 1.58, 95% CI = 1.30-1.93, P<.001). CONCLUSION: A feasible FI that can be used in routine medical evaluation in a primary care setting was developed, and a 12.3% prevalence and a 13% incidence of frailty was demonstrated in community-dwelling Chinese older adults. Frailty is more common for urban and female residents in the oldest old group. Being frail significantly predicts geriatric adverse outcomes, indicating the importance of early screening and intervention in frail individuals in primary care.
基金:
Grants D070507011 30000 and D07050701130701 from the Beijing Municipal Commission on Science and Technology,
Grant 201002011 from the Ministry of Health of China, Grants 2012AA02A514, 0S2012GR0150,
2012ZX09303–005 from the Ministry of Science and Technology of China,
Grant ZYLX201301 from the Beijing Municipal Administration of Hospitals.
第一作者机构:[1]Neurobiology, Beijing Institute of Geriatrics[2]Geriatrics, Beijing Institute of Geriatrics, Xuanwu Hospital of Capital Medical University[3]Parkinson’s Disease Center, Beijing Institute for Brain Disorders[4]Key Laboratory on Neurodegenerative Disease, Ministry of Education[5]Beijing Key Laboratory for Parkinson’s Disease
通讯作者:
通讯机构:[*1]Department of Neurobiology, Geriatrics, and Neurology, Xuanwu Hospital, No. 45 Changchun St., Xicheng District, Beijing 100053, China.
推荐引用方式(GB/T 7714):
Zheng Zheng,Shaochen Guan,Hui Ding,et al.Prevalence and Incidence of Frailty in Community-Dwelling Older People: Beijing Longitudinal Study of Aging II[J].JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN GERIATRICS SOCIETY.2016,64(6):1281-1286.doi:10.1111/jgs.14135.
APA:
Zheng Zheng,Shaochen Guan,Hui Ding,Zhihui Wang,Jin Zhang...&Piu Chan.(2016).Prevalence and Incidence of Frailty in Community-Dwelling Older People: Beijing Longitudinal Study of Aging II.JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN GERIATRICS SOCIETY,64,(6)
MLA:
Zheng Zheng,et al."Prevalence and Incidence of Frailty in Community-Dwelling Older People: Beijing Longitudinal Study of Aging II".JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN GERIATRICS SOCIETY 64..6(2016):1281-1286