Prospective cohort study of the effects of motor cognitive risk syndrome on fractures after falls

Xiaochen Wang, Huimin Li, Dong-yi Tao
{"title":"Prospective cohort study of the effects of motor cognitive risk syndrome on fractures after falls","authors":"Xiaochen Wang, Huimin Li, Dong-yi Tao","doi":"10.3760/CMA.J.ISSN.1672-7088.2020.08.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective \nTo investigate the risk factors of elderly, sports cognitive risk syndrome falling, repeated falls and fractures after falls. \n \n \nMethods \nA total of 3 552 people were enrolled in the Department of Neurology, the First Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University from April 2015 to April 2016. The demographics of each selected individual were recorded. The selected individuals were assessed by MMSE for the presence of Subjective Cognitive Complaint (SCC), and the pace was used to assess whether there was slow walking and whether there was MCR (SCC + slow walking). All individuals were divided into MCR group and non-MCR group according to the evaluation results. The non-MCR group was subdivided into SCC subgroup, slow speed walking subgroup and healthy subgroup. Baseline variables were compared between the two groups, and demographics between subgroups, subgroups, and MCR groups were compared. Follow-up was followed every 4 months for a total of 2 years. The number of people who fell during the follow-up period, repeated falls, and fractures were recorded. With all demographics and SCC, walking at a slower pace, MCR was an independent variable, with a fall during follow-up, repeated falls and post-fall fractures as dependent variables, and a COX proportional hazard regression model of independent and dependent variables. \n \n \nResults \nThe proportions of the MCR group in higher education, depression, the use of crutches were 10.2% (36/352), 22.4% (79/352), 44.9% (158/352), the BMI, number of medications in the MCR group were (27.0 ± 4.3) kg/m2, (6.8±3.2), the proportions of non-MCR group in higher education, depression, using crutches ratio were 22.9% (732/3 200), 12.8% (409/3 200), 22.8% (729 /3 200), the BMI, number of medications of non-MCR group were (24.8 ± 3.8) kg/m2, (5.2 ± 3.1), the two groups showed statistical significant difference(χ2 values were 29.93, 3.45, 24.98, t values were 12.34, 82.71, P<0.05). The proportions of higher education, depression and crutches were 18.9% (289/1531), 13.2% (202 /1531) and 22.5% (344/1531) in SCC subgroup. The difference between MCR group and SCC subgroup was statistically significant (χ2 values were 14.99, 19.28, 73.56, P<0.05). The higher education level of the slow walking group was 16.6% (34/205), which was significantly different from that of the MCR group (χ2 value was 4.77, P<0.05). The proportions of higher education level, arthritis, depression and crutches in the healthy subgroup were 27.9% (409/1 464), 12.9 (190/1 464), 11.2% (164/1 464) and 19.7% (288/1 464), while that in the SCC subgroup were 18.9% (289/1 531), 16.2 (248/1 531), 13.2% (202/1 531) and 22.5% (344/1 531), and that in the slow walking subgroup were 16.6% (34/205), 21.5% (44/205), 20.9 (43/205) and 47.3% (97/205). There were significant differences among the three subgroups (χ2 values were 13.08-78.28, P<0.05). BMI and number of drugs in healthy subgroups were (23.4±4.4) kg/m2 and (4.7±2.8) , SCC group was (25.2±4.3) kg/m2 and (5.1±2.9) kinds, and slow walking subgroup were (25.1±3.8) kg/m2 and (6.7±3.1) kinds. The differences among the three subgroups were statistically significant (t values were 2.68,7.21, P<0.05). The risks of falling, repeated falling and fracture after falling in MCR patients were 1.22, 1.47 and 2.54 (P<0.05). \n \n \nConclusions \nAge, MCR is a high risk factor for falls in the elderly, repeated falls and fractures after falls. In clinical care, MCR needs to be evaluated and attention should be payed to the elderly. \n \n \nKey words: \nCognitive impairment; Fall; Post-fall fracture; Cohort study; Elderly","PeriodicalId":22999,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of practical nursing","volume":"36 1","pages":"583-587"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of practical nursing","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3760/CMA.J.ISSN.1672-7088.2020.08.005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Objective To investigate the risk factors of elderly, sports cognitive risk syndrome falling, repeated falls and fractures after falls. Methods A total of 3 552 people were enrolled in the Department of Neurology, the First Affiliated Hospital of China Medical University from April 2015 to April 2016. The demographics of each selected individual were recorded. The selected individuals were assessed by MMSE for the presence of Subjective Cognitive Complaint (SCC), and the pace was used to assess whether there was slow walking and whether there was MCR (SCC + slow walking). All individuals were divided into MCR group and non-MCR group according to the evaluation results. The non-MCR group was subdivided into SCC subgroup, slow speed walking subgroup and healthy subgroup. Baseline variables were compared between the two groups, and demographics between subgroups, subgroups, and MCR groups were compared. Follow-up was followed every 4 months for a total of 2 years. The number of people who fell during the follow-up period, repeated falls, and fractures were recorded. With all demographics and SCC, walking at a slower pace, MCR was an independent variable, with a fall during follow-up, repeated falls and post-fall fractures as dependent variables, and a COX proportional hazard regression model of independent and dependent variables. Results The proportions of the MCR group in higher education, depression, the use of crutches were 10.2% (36/352), 22.4% (79/352), 44.9% (158/352), the BMI, number of medications in the MCR group were (27.0 ± 4.3) kg/m2, (6.8±3.2), the proportions of non-MCR group in higher education, depression, using crutches ratio were 22.9% (732/3 200), 12.8% (409/3 200), 22.8% (729 /3 200), the BMI, number of medications of non-MCR group were (24.8 ± 3.8) kg/m2, (5.2 ± 3.1), the two groups showed statistical significant difference(χ2 values were 29.93, 3.45, 24.98, t values were 12.34, 82.71, P<0.05). The proportions of higher education, depression and crutches were 18.9% (289/1531), 13.2% (202 /1531) and 22.5% (344/1531) in SCC subgroup. The difference between MCR group and SCC subgroup was statistically significant (χ2 values were 14.99, 19.28, 73.56, P<0.05). The higher education level of the slow walking group was 16.6% (34/205), which was significantly different from that of the MCR group (χ2 value was 4.77, P<0.05). The proportions of higher education level, arthritis, depression and crutches in the healthy subgroup were 27.9% (409/1 464), 12.9 (190/1 464), 11.2% (164/1 464) and 19.7% (288/1 464), while that in the SCC subgroup were 18.9% (289/1 531), 16.2 (248/1 531), 13.2% (202/1 531) and 22.5% (344/1 531), and that in the slow walking subgroup were 16.6% (34/205), 21.5% (44/205), 20.9 (43/205) and 47.3% (97/205). There were significant differences among the three subgroups (χ2 values were 13.08-78.28, P<0.05). BMI and number of drugs in healthy subgroups were (23.4±4.4) kg/m2 and (4.7±2.8) , SCC group was (25.2±4.3) kg/m2 and (5.1±2.9) kinds, and slow walking subgroup were (25.1±3.8) kg/m2 and (6.7±3.1) kinds. The differences among the three subgroups were statistically significant (t values were 2.68,7.21, P<0.05). The risks of falling, repeated falling and fracture after falling in MCR patients were 1.22, 1.47 and 2.54 (P<0.05). Conclusions Age, MCR is a high risk factor for falls in the elderly, repeated falls and fractures after falls. In clinical care, MCR needs to be evaluated and attention should be payed to the elderly. Key words: Cognitive impairment; Fall; Post-fall fracture; Cohort study; Elderly
运动认知危险综合征对跌倒后骨折影响的前瞻性队列研究
目的探讨老年人跌倒、运动认知危险综合征、反复跌倒及跌倒后骨折的危险因素。方法选取2015年4月至2016年4月在中国医科大学第一附属医院神经内科就诊的患者3 552例。记录了每个选定个体的人口统计数据。采用MMSE评估被选个体是否存在主观认知抱怨(SCC),并采用步速评估是否存在缓慢行走和MCR (SCC +缓慢行走)。根据评价结果将所有个体分为MCR组和非MCR组。非mcr组又分为SCC亚组、慢速行走亚组和健康亚组。比较两组之间的基线变量,并比较亚组、亚组和MCR组之间的人口统计数据。每4个月随访一次,共随访2年。在随访期间,记录了跌倒、重复跌倒和骨折的人数。在所有人口统计学和SCC中,行走速度较慢,MCR为自变量,随访期间跌倒、重复跌倒和跌倒后骨折为因变量,自变量和因变量的COX比例风险回归模型。结果MCR组高学历、抑郁、使用拐杖的比例分别为10.2%(36/352)、22.4%(79/352)、44.9% (158/352),MCR组BMI、用药次数分别为(27.0±4.3)kg/m2、(6.8±3.2),非MCR组高学历、抑郁、使用拐杖的比例分别为22.9%(732/3 200)、12.8%(409/3 200)、22.8%(729 /3 200),非MCR组BMI、用药次数分别为(24.8±3.8)kg/m2、(5.2±3.1),非MCR组BMI、用药次数分别为(24.8±3.8)kg/m2、(5.2±3.1)。两组比较差异有统计学意义(χ2值分别为29.93、3.45、24.98,t值分别为12.34、82.71,P<0.05)。SCC亚组中高学历、抑郁、拐杖的比例分别为18.9%(289/1531)、13.2%(202 /1531)和22.5%(344/1531)。MCR组与SCC亚组间差异有统计学意义(χ2值分别为14.99、19.28、73.56,P<0.05)。慢走组高学历比例为16.6%(34/205),与MCR组比较差异有统计学意义(χ2值为4.77,P<0.05)。健康亚组中高学历、关节炎、抑郁、拐杖的比例分别为27.9%(409/1 464)、12.9(190/1 464)、11.2%(164/1 464)、19.7% (288/1 464),SCC亚组中高学历、关节炎、抑郁、拐杖的比例分别为18.9%(289/1 531)、16.2%(248/1 531)、13.2%(202/1 531)、22.5%(344/1 531),慢行亚组中高学历、关节炎、抑郁、拐杖的比例分别为16.6%(34/205)、21.5%(44/205)、20.9(43/205)、47.3%(97/205)。3个亚组间差异有统计学意义(χ2值为13.08 ~ 78.28,P<0.05)。健康亚组BMI和药物数量分别为(23.4±4.4)kg/m2和(4.7±2.8)种,SCC组BMI为(25.2±4.3)kg/m2和(5.1±2.9)种,慢行亚组BMI为(25.1±3.8)kg/m2和(6.7±3.1)种。3个亚组间差异均有统计学意义(t值分别为2.68、7.21,P<0.05)。MCR患者发生跌倒、重复跌倒和跌倒后骨折的风险分别为1.22、1.47和2.54 (P<0.05)。结论年龄、MCR是老年人跌倒、重复跌倒和跌倒后骨折的高危因素。在临床护理中,需要对MCR进行评估,并对老年人给予重视。关键词:认知障碍;秋天;Post-fall断裂;队列研究;上了年纪的
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信