Poor self-rated health predicts the incidence of functional disability in elderly community dwellers in Japan: a prospective cohort study
Poor self-rated health predicts the incidence of functional disability in elderly community dwellers in Japan: a prospective cohort study
复制标题
DOI：
10.1186/s12877-020-01743-0
复制
发表时间：
2020-09-07
期刊：
影响因子：
4.1
通讯作者：
Okayama, Akira
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Takahashi, Shuko;Tanno, Kozo;Okayama, Akira
虽然先前的大量人口研究表明，在西方国家，自评健康状况差的老年人是功能性残疾的高危人群，但很少有研究在日本社区居民中调查SRH与功能性残疾的关系。本研究调查了日本老年社区居民中SRH与功能性残疾之间的关系，长期护理保险(LTCI)制度的认证定义。方法在这项前瞻性研究中，对10,690名年龄在65岁或以上、没有心血管疾病病史或LTCI认证的个人进行了10.5年的跟踪调查。SRH被分为四类：好的、相当好的、不好的或差的和差的。采用COX比例风险模型计算各性别SRH组中功能性残疾发生率的风险比(HRs)。被评为SRH差的男性在功能残疾方面得分显著较高(HR[95%可信区间]：差=1.74[1.42，2.14])，而被评为相当好、既不好也不差、较差的女性在功能残疾方面得分显著更高(相当好=1.12[1.00，1.25]，既不好也不差=1.29[1.13，1.48]，差=1.92[1.65，2.24]：P代表趋势
BackgroundAlthough previous large population studies showed elderly with poor self-rated health (SRH) to be at a high risk of functional disability in Western countries, there have been few studies in which the association between SRH and functional disability was investigated in Japanese community dwellers. The association between SRH and functional disability, defined as certification of the long-term care insurance (LTCI) system, in Japanese elderly community dwellers was examined in this study.MethodsA total of 10,690 individuals (39.5% men, mean age of 71.4years) who were 65years of age or more who did not have a history of cardiovascular disease or LTCI certification were followed in this prospective study for 10.5years. SRH was classified into four categories: good, rather good, neither good nor poor, and poor. A Cox proportional-hazards model was used to determine the hazard ratios (HRs) for the incidence of functional disability among the SRH groups for each sex.ResultsThe number of individuals with functional disability was 3377. Men who rated poor for SRH scored significantly higher for functional disability (HR [95% confidence interval]: poor=1.74 [1.42, 2.14]) while women who rated rather good, neither good nor poor, and poor scored significantly higher for functional disability (rather good =1.12 [1.00, 1.25], neither good nor poor=1.29 [1.13, 1.48], poor=1.92 [1.65, 2.24]: p for trend