4.7 Article

Dietary Vitamin K Intake Is Associated with Cognition and Behaviour among Geriatric Patients: The CLIP Study

期刊

NUTRIENTS
卷 7, 期 8, 页码 6739-6750

出版社

MDPI AG
DOI: 10.3390/nu7085306

关键词

-

资金

  1. Medical School, University of Angers, UNAM, Angers, France [F-49933]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Our objective was to determine whether dietary vitamin K intake was associated with cognition and behavior among older adults. 192 consecutive participants >= 65 years, recruited in the cross-sectional CLIP (Cognition and LIPophilic vitamins) study, were separated into two groups according to the tertiles of dietary phylloquinone intake (i.e., lowest third below 207 mu g/day versus the other two thirds combined). Daily dietary phylloquinone intake was estimated from 50-item interviewer-administered food frequency questionnaire. Cognition was assessed with Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE); behaviour with Frontotemporal Behavioral Rating Scale (FBRS). Age, gender, social problems, education, body mass index (BMI), comorbidities, history of stroke, use vitamin K antagonists, inadequate fatty fish intake, serum thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH), vitamin B12, albumin, and estimated glomerular filtration rate were used as confounders. Compared to participants in the lowest third of dietary phylloquinone intake (n = 64), those with higher intake had higher (i.e., better) mean MMSE score (22.0 +/- 5.7 versus 19.9 +/- 6.2, p = 0.024) and lower (i.e., better) FBRS score (1.5 +/- 1.2 versus 1.9 +/- 1.3, p = 0.042). In multivariate linear regressions, log dietary phylloquinone intake was positively associated with MMSE score (adjusted beta = 1.66, p = 0.013) and inversely associated with FBRS score (adjusted beta = -0.33, p = 0.037). Specifically, log dietary phylloquinone intake correlated negatively with FBRS subscore of physical neglect (r = -0.24, p = 0.001). Higher dietary phylloquinone intake was associated with better cognition and behavior among older adults.

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

4.7
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