4.6 Article

MIDLIFE BODY MASS INDEX TRAJECTORY AND RISK OF FRAILTY 8 YEARS LATER IN TAIWAN

期刊

JOURNAL OF NUTRITION HEALTH & AGING
卷 23, 期 9, 页码 849-855

出版社

SPRINGER FRANCE
DOI: 10.1007/s12603-019-1226-6

关键词

body mass index; obesity; trajectory; frailty

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: Few studies have focused on weight change and frailty, especially in Asia. This research aimed to evaluate midlife body mass index (BMI) trajectory and assess its relationship with frailty 8 years later in Taiwan. Design: A prospective cohort study. Setting and Participants: Data were retrieved from the Taiwan Longitudinal Study on Aging conducted from 1999 to 2007. The analysis was restricted to respondents aged between 50 to 69 years old, who were not frail in 1999 and were alive in 2007 (n=1609). Measurements: Frailty was defined using the Fried criteria. The group-based model of trajectory was used to estimate BMI trajectories among elderly participants. Logistic regression analysis was used to examine the association between BMI change and frailty. Results: Four trajectory classes were identified and each remained stable during the 8-year follow-up. There were 316 participants (20.3%) in the low-normal weight group (baseline BMI=20.38 kg/m2), 737 participants (44.7%) in the high-normal weight group (baseline BMI=23.22 kg/m2), 449 participants (28.4%) in the overweight group (baseline BMI=26.24 kg/m2), and 107 participants (6.6%) in the obesity group (baseline BMI=30.65 kg/m2). After adjustment for confounding factors, the low-normal weight group and obesity group were associated with increased frailty compared with the high-normal weight group. Conclusion: Our results showed that the BMI trajectories of midlife individuals tended to be constant and those in both the low-normal weight group and obesity group had an increased risk of developing frailty in later life. Therefore, an optimal weight-targeting strategy should be considered for Asian elderly individuals.

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

4.6
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