4.5 Article

Physical frailty: vulnerability of patients suffering from late-life depression

期刊

AGING & MENTAL HEALTH
卷 18, 期 5, 页码 570-578

出版社

ROUTLEDGE JOURNALS, TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/13607863.2013.827628

关键词

depression; frailty; elderly; Netherlands Study of Depression in Older persons (NESDO)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: Frailty, a state of increased risk of negative health outcomes, is increasingly recognized as a relevant concept for identifying older persons in need of preventative geriatric interventions. Even though broader concepts of frailty include psychological characteristics, frailty is largely neglected in mental health care. The aim of the present study is to examine the prevalence of physical frailty in depressed older patients and its potential overlap with depression criteria. Method: Cross-sectional observational study including 378 depressed and 132 non-depressed adults aged >= 60 years according to Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) criteria. Physical frailty was defined as >3 out of 5 criteria (handgrip strength, weight loss, poor endurance, walking speed, low physical activity). Results: Prevalence rates of physical frailty were 27.2% and 9.1% among depressed and non-depressed participants, respectively, which remained significant after controlling for relevant covariates (odds ratio [OR] = 2.66 [95% confidence interval [C.I.] = 1.36, 5.24], p = .004). Physical frailty in depression was associated with more severe depressive symptoms; this association remained significant in subsequent analyses with purely physical proxies for frailty (hand grip strength, walking speed) and different severity measures of depressive symptoms. Conclusion: A quarter of depressed older patients is physically frail, especially the most depressed group. This cannot be explained by overlap in criteria and should be examined in future studies, primarily on its presumed clinical relevance.

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

4.5
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