4.7 Article

Vitamin B12 deficiency in the aged:: a population-based study

Journal

AGE AND AGEING
Volume 36, Issue 2, Pages 177-183

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/ageing/afl150

Keywords

vitamin B12; holotranscobalamin; vitamin B12 deficiency; aged; screening; cohort study

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: vitamin B12 deficiency is common in the aged, but it is controversial whether only some risk groups should be investigated instead of screening the entire aged population. Objectives: to describe the prevalence of vitamin B12 deficiency in the Finnish aged, and to find out if the subjects especially prone to vitamin B12 deficiency could be identified by the risk factors or clinical correlates. Design: a cross-sectional, population-based study of 1048 aged subjects (age 65-100 years) was carried out. Data on lifestyle factors and clinical conditions were collected, physical examinations were conducted and laboratory variables related to vitamin B12 were measured. Results: vitamin B12 deficiency had been previously diagnosed in 27 (2.6%) subjects, and a laboratory diagnosis (total vitamin B12 < 150 pmol/l, or total vitamin B12 150-250 pmol/l and holotranscobalamin <= 37 pmol/l and homocysteine >= 15 mu mol/l) was made for 97 (9.5%) subjects. Low serum total vitamin B12 (< 150 pmol/l) was observed in 6.1% and borderline total vitamin B12 (150-250 pmol/l) in 32% of the subjects. Male gender (OR 1.9, 95% CI 1.2-2.9), age >= 75 (OR 2.2, 95% CI 1.4-3.4) and refraining from milk products (OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.2-4.4) increased the probability for vitamin B12 deficiency. Anaemia (OR 1.3, 95% CI 0.7-2.3) or macrocytosis (OR 1.2, 95% CI 0.6-2.7) did not predict vitamin B12 deficiency. Conclusion: undiagnosed vitamin B12 deficiency is remarkably common in the aged, but no specific risk group for screening can be identified. Thus, biochemical screening of unselected aged population is justified. General practitioners play a key role in diagnosing early vitamin B12 deficiency.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available