Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorLamb, Sarah E
dc.date.accessioned2020-06-16T17:25:13Z
dc.date.available2020-06-16T17:25:13Z
dc.date.issued2020-01
dc.identifier.citationSolveig A. Arnadottir, Julie Bruce, Ranjit Lall, Emma J. Withers, Martin Underwood, Fiona Shaw, Ray Sheridan, Anower Hossain, Sarah E. Lamb & on behalf of the Pre-FIT Study Group. The importance of different frailty domains in a population based sample in England. BMC Geriatr 20, 16 (2020).en
dc.identifier.issn1471-2318
dc.identifier.urihttps://oxfordhealth-nhs.archive.knowledgearc.net/handle/123456789/489
dc.descriptionOpen Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.en
dc.description.abstractBackground The aim was to estimate the prevalence of frailty and relative contribution of physical/balance, nutritive, cognitive and sensory frailty to important adverse health states (falls, physical activity levels, outdoor mobility, problems in self-care or usual activities, and lack of energy or accomplishment) in an English cohort by age and sex. Methods Analysis of baseline data from a cohort of 9803 community-dwelling participants in a clinical trial. The sample was drawn from a random selection of all people aged 70 or more registered with 63 general practices across England. Data were collected by postal questionnaire. Frailty was measured with the Strawbridge questionnaire. We used cross sectional, multivariate logistic regression to estimate the association between frailty domains and known correlates and adjusted for age. Some models were stratified by sex. Results Mean age of participants was 78 years (sd 5.7), range 70 to 101 and 47.5% (4653/9803) were men. The prevalence of overall frailty was 20.7% (2005/9671) and there was no difference in prevalence by sex (Odds Ratio 0.98; 95% Confidence Interval 0.89 to 1.08). Sensory frailty was the most common and this was reported by more men (1823/4586) than women (1469/5056; Odds Ratio for sensory frailty 0.62, 95% Confidence Interval 0.57 to 0.68). Men were less likely than women to have physical or nutritive frailty. Physical frailty had the strongest independent associations with adverse health states. However, sensory frailty was independently associated with falls, less frequent walking, problems in self-care and usual activities, lack of energy and accomplishment. Conclusions Physical frailty was more strongly associated with adverse health states, but sensory frailty was much more common. The health gain from intervention for sensory frailty in England is likely to be substantial, particularly for older men. Sensory frailty should be explored further as an important target of intervention to improve health outcomes for older people both at clinical and population level.en
dc.description.sponsorshipSupported by the NIHRen
dc.description.urihttps://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-019-1411-9en
dc.subjectFrailtyen
dc.subjectOlder Peopleen
dc.titleThe importance of different frailty domains in a population based sample in Englanden
dc.typeArticleen


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record