4.4 Article

Multimorbidity and health-related quality of life in the older population: results from the German KORA-Age study

期刊

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/1477-7525-9-53

关键词

-

资金

  1. Helmholtz Zentrum Munchen - German Research Center for Environmental Health
  2. German Federal Ministry of Education and Research [BMBF FKZ 01ET0713]
  3. State of Bavaria

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Multimorbidity in the older population is well acknowledged to negatively affect health-related quality of life (HRQL). Several studies have examined the independent effects of single diseases; however, little research has focused on interaction between diseases. The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of six self-reported major conditions and their combinations on HRQL measured by the EQ-5D. Methods: The EQ-5D was administered in the population-based KORA-Age study of 4,565 Germans aged 65 years or older. A generalised additive regression model was used to assess the effects of chronic conditions on HRQL and to account for the nonlinear associations with age and body mass index (BMI). Disease interactions were identified by a forward variable selection method. Results: The conditions with the greatest negative impact on the EQ-5D index were the history of a stroke (regression coefficient -11.3, p < 0.0001) and chronic bronchitis (regression coefficient -8.1, p < 0.0001). Patients with both diabetes and coronary disorders showed more impaired HRQL than could be expected from their separate effects (coefficient of interaction term -8.1, p < 0.0001). A synergistic effect on HRQL was also found for the combination of coronary disorders and stroke. The effect of BMI on the mean EQ-5D index was inverse U-shaped with a maximum at around 24.8 kg/m(2). Conclusions: There are important interactions between coronary problems, diabetes mellitus, and the history of a stroke that negatively affect HRQL in the older German population. Not only high but also low BMI is associated with impairments in health status.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据