根据县级劣势,美国社区生活老年人的虚弱、痴呆和残疾发生率

Yi Wang, Emma X Zang, Kendra Davis-Plourde, Brent Vander Wyk, Thomas M Gill, Robert D Becher
{"title":"根据县级劣势,美国社区生活老年人的虚弱、痴呆和残疾发生率","authors":"Yi Wang, Emma X Zang, Kendra Davis-Plourde, Brent Vander Wyk, Thomas M Gill, Robert D Becher","doi":"10.1111/jgs.19465","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>County-level contextual disadvantage is a novel social determinant of health (SDOH) for older persons. No prior study has evaluated the national incidence of geriatric conditions according to county-level contextual disadvantage among older persons. Our objective was to estimate the incidence of frailty, probable dementia, and disability over a 5-year period on the basis of county-level contextual disadvantage among community-living older Americans.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective, nationally representative longitudinal study used data from the 2015 cohort of the National Health and Aging Trends Study (NHATS), linked to various publicly available, geographically based contextual datasets. County-level disadvantage was assessed using the Geriatric Index of County-Level Multi-Dimensional Contextual Disadvantage (GERi-County), which included nine contextual indicators from these linked datasets. Data on frailty, probable dementia, and activities of daily living (ADL) disability were obtained from the NHATS annual assessments (2015-2020).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Totally 7499 participants were included in the analysis, representing 40,728,543 community-living older Americans. The 5-year incidence rates per 1000 person-years were significantly higher in the disadvantaged compared to the non-disadvantaged counties: 52.8 (95% confidence interval (CI), 41.6-64.0) versus 40.3 (95% CI, 37.2-43.3) for frailty; 29.9 (95% CI, 25.4-34.3) versus 21.2 (95% CI, 19.0-23.4) for probable dementia; and 78.1 (95% CI, 70.2-86.0) versus 62.5 (95% CI, 58.2-66.8) for ADL disability. For participants who lived versus did not live in disadvantaged counties, the age- and sex-adjusted HRs were 1.38 (95% CI, 1.08-1.75) for frailty, 1.53 (95% CI, 1.25-1.86) for probable dementia, and 1.30 (95% CI, 1.13-1.49) for ADL disability.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Community-living older Americans who reside in disadvantaged counties have a higher incidence of frailty, probable dementia, and ADL disability over a 5-year follow-up period compared to their non-disadvantaged counterparts. Findings underscore the vital, underappreciated role that county-level social contextual disadvantage plays on clinically meaningful outcomes in older persons in the U.S.</p>","PeriodicalId":94112,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American Geriatrics Society","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Incidence of Frailty, Dementia, and Disability Among Community-Living Older Americans According to County-Level Disadvantage.\",\"authors\":\"Yi Wang, Emma X Zang, Kendra Davis-Plourde, Brent Vander Wyk, Thomas M Gill, Robert D Becher\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jgs.19465\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>County-level contextual disadvantage is a novel social determinant of health (SDOH) for older persons. No prior study has evaluated the national incidence of geriatric conditions according to county-level contextual disadvantage among older persons. Our objective was to estimate the incidence of frailty, probable dementia, and disability over a 5-year period on the basis of county-level contextual disadvantage among community-living older Americans.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This prospective, nationally representative longitudinal study used data from the 2015 cohort of the National Health and Aging Trends Study (NHATS), linked to various publicly available, geographically based contextual datasets. County-level disadvantage was assessed using the Geriatric Index of County-Level Multi-Dimensional Contextual Disadvantage (GERi-County), which included nine contextual indicators from these linked datasets. Data on frailty, probable dementia, and activities of daily living (ADL) disability were obtained from the NHATS annual assessments (2015-2020).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Totally 7499 participants were included in the analysis, representing 40,728,543 community-living older Americans. The 5-year incidence rates per 1000 person-years were significantly higher in the disadvantaged compared to the non-disadvantaged counties: 52.8 (95% confidence interval (CI), 41.6-64.0) versus 40.3 (95% CI, 37.2-43.3) for frailty; 29.9 (95% CI, 25.4-34.3) versus 21.2 (95% CI, 19.0-23.4) for probable dementia; and 78.1 (95% CI, 70.2-86.0) versus 62.5 (95% CI, 58.2-66.8) for ADL disability. For participants who lived versus did not live in disadvantaged counties, the age- and sex-adjusted HRs were 1.38 (95% CI, 1.08-1.75) for frailty, 1.53 (95% CI, 1.25-1.86) for probable dementia, and 1.30 (95% CI, 1.13-1.49) for ADL disability.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Community-living older Americans who reside in disadvantaged counties have a higher incidence of frailty, probable dementia, and ADL disability over a 5-year follow-up period compared to their non-disadvantaged counterparts. Findings underscore the vital, underappreciated role that county-level social contextual disadvantage plays on clinically meaningful outcomes in older persons in the U.S.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94112,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the American Geriatrics Society\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the American Geriatrics Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.19465\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the American Geriatrics Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jgs.19465","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:县级环境劣势是老年人健康的一个新的社会决定因素。以前没有研究根据县一级老年人的环境劣势来评估全国老年疾病的发病率。我们的目的是估计在5年的时间里,在县级环境劣势的基础上,生活在社区的美国老年人的虚弱、可能的痴呆和残疾的发生率。方法:这项前瞻性的、具有全国代表性的纵向研究使用了2015年国家健康与老龄化趋势研究(NHATS)队列的数据,并与各种公开可用的、基于地理位置的背景数据集相关联。使用县级多维上下文劣势老年指数(GERi-County)评估县级劣势,该指数包括来自这些关联数据集的9个上下文指标。从NHATS年度评估(2015-2020)中获得了虚弱、可能的痴呆和日常生活活动(ADL)残疾的数据。结果:共有7499名参与者被纳入分析,代表40,728,543名居住在社区的美国老年人。与非弱势县相比,弱势县每1000人年的5年发病率显著更高:虚弱县为52.8(95%可信区间(CI), 41.6-64.0),而弱势县为40.3 (95% CI, 37.2-43.3);29.9 (95% CI, 25.4-34.3)对21.2 (95% CI, 19.0-23.4);ADL残疾为78.1 (95% CI, 70.2-86.0)比62.5 (95% CI, 58.2-66.8)。对于生活在弱势县的参与者和没有生活在弱势县的参与者,年龄和性别调整后的hr为虚弱的1.38 (95% CI, 1.08-1.75),可能的痴呆的1.53 (95% CI, 1.25-1.86), ADL残疾的1.30 (95% CI, 1.13-1.49)。结论:在5年的随访期间,居住在弱势县的社区生活的美国老年人与非弱势县的老年人相比,有更高的虚弱、可能的痴呆和ADL残疾发生率。研究结果强调了重要的,被低估的作用,县级社会背景劣势在美国老年人临床有意义的结果中发挥作用
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Incidence of Frailty, Dementia, and Disability Among Community-Living Older Americans According to County-Level Disadvantage.

Background: County-level contextual disadvantage is a novel social determinant of health (SDOH) for older persons. No prior study has evaluated the national incidence of geriatric conditions according to county-level contextual disadvantage among older persons. Our objective was to estimate the incidence of frailty, probable dementia, and disability over a 5-year period on the basis of county-level contextual disadvantage among community-living older Americans.

Methods: This prospective, nationally representative longitudinal study used data from the 2015 cohort of the National Health and Aging Trends Study (NHATS), linked to various publicly available, geographically based contextual datasets. County-level disadvantage was assessed using the Geriatric Index of County-Level Multi-Dimensional Contextual Disadvantage (GERi-County), which included nine contextual indicators from these linked datasets. Data on frailty, probable dementia, and activities of daily living (ADL) disability were obtained from the NHATS annual assessments (2015-2020).

Results: Totally 7499 participants were included in the analysis, representing 40,728,543 community-living older Americans. The 5-year incidence rates per 1000 person-years were significantly higher in the disadvantaged compared to the non-disadvantaged counties: 52.8 (95% confidence interval (CI), 41.6-64.0) versus 40.3 (95% CI, 37.2-43.3) for frailty; 29.9 (95% CI, 25.4-34.3) versus 21.2 (95% CI, 19.0-23.4) for probable dementia; and 78.1 (95% CI, 70.2-86.0) versus 62.5 (95% CI, 58.2-66.8) for ADL disability. For participants who lived versus did not live in disadvantaged counties, the age- and sex-adjusted HRs were 1.38 (95% CI, 1.08-1.75) for frailty, 1.53 (95% CI, 1.25-1.86) for probable dementia, and 1.30 (95% CI, 1.13-1.49) for ADL disability.

Conclusions: Community-living older Americans who reside in disadvantaged counties have a higher incidence of frailty, probable dementia, and ADL disability over a 5-year follow-up period compared to their non-disadvantaged counterparts. Findings underscore the vital, underappreciated role that county-level social contextual disadvantage plays on clinically meaningful outcomes in older persons in the U.S.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍:
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信