OBJECTIVES: To describe the association between frailty and health status, the progression of frailty, and the relationship between frailty and mortality in older men. DESIGN: Cross-sectional and prospective cohort study. SETTING: Six U.S. clinical centers. PARTICIPANTS: Five thousand nine hundred ninety-three community-dwelling men aged 65 and older. MEASUREMENTS: Frailty was defined as three or more of the following: sarcopenia (low appendicular skeletal mass adjusted for height and body fat), weakness (grip strength), self-reported exhaustion, low activity level, and slow walking speed. Prefrail men met one or two criteria; robust men had none. Follow-up averaged 4.7 years. RESULTS: At baseline, 240 subjects (4.0%) were frail, 2,395 (40.0%) were prefrail, and 3,358 were robust (56.0%). Frail men were less healthy in most measures of self-reported health than prefrail or robust men. Frailty was somewhat more common in African Americans (6.6%) and Asians (5.8%) than Caucasians (3.8%). At the second visit, men who were frail at baseline tended to remain frail (24.2%) or die (37.1%) or were unable to complete the follow-up visit (26.2%); robust men tended to remain robust (54.4%). Frail men were approximately twice as likely to die as robust men (multivariate hazard ratio (MHR)=2.05, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.55-2.72). Mortality risk for frail men was greater in all weight categories than for nonfrail men but was highest for normal-weight frail men (MHR=2.39, 95% CI=1.51-3.79, P for interaction=.01). The relationship between frailty and mortality was somewhat stronger in younger men than older men (P for interaction=.01). CONCLUSION: Frailty in older men is associated with poorer health and a greater risk of mortality.
OBJECTIVES: To describe the association between frailty and health status, the progression of frailty, and the relationship between frailty and mortality in older men. DESIGN: Cross-sectional and prospective cohort study. SETTING: Six U.S. clinical centers. PARTICIPANTS: Five thousand nine hundred ninety-three community-dwelling men aged 65 and older. MEASUREMENTS: Frailty was defined as three or more of the following: sarcopenia (low appendicular skeletal mass adjusted for height and body fat), weakness (grip strength), self-reported exhaustion, low activity level, and slow walking speed. Prefrail men met one or two criteria; robust men had none. Follow-up averaged 4.7 years. RESULTS: At baseline, 240 subjects (4.0%) were frail, 2,395 (40.0%) were prefrail, and 3,358 were robust (56.0%). Frail men were less healthy in most measures of self-reported health than prefrail or robust men. Frailty was somewhat more common in African Americans (6.6%) and Asians (5.8%) than Caucasians (3.8%). At the second visit, men who were frail at baseline tended to remain frail (24.2%) or die (37.1%) or were unable to complete the follow-up visit (26.2%); robust men tended to remain robust (54.4%). Frail men were approximately twice as likely to die as robust men (multivariate hazard ratio (MHR)=2.05, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.55-2.72). Mortality risk for frail men was greater in all weight categories than for nonfrail men but was highest for normal-weight frail men (MHR=2.39, 95% CI=1.51-3.79, P for interaction=.01). The relationship between frailty and mortality was somewhat stronger in younger men than older men (P for interaction=.01). CONCLUSION: Frailty in older men is associated with poorer health and a greater risk of mortality.
Authors: Matthew R Smith; Fred Saad; Blair Egerdie; Paul R Sieber; Teuvo L J Tammela; Chunlei Ke; Benjamin Z Leder; Carsten Goessl Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2012-05-29 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Peggy M Cawthon; Susan K Ewing; Dawn C Mackey; Howard A Fink; Steven R Cummings; Kristine E Ensrud; Marcia L Stefanick; Doug C Bauer; Jane A Cauley; Eric S Orwoll Journal: J Bone Miner Res Date: 2012-10 Impact factor: 6.741
Authors: Baback Roshanravan; Minesh Khatri; Cassianne Robinson-Cohen; Greg Levin; Kushang V Patel; Ian H de Boer; Stephen Seliger; John Ruzinski; Jonathan Himmelfarb; Bryan Kestenbaum Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2012-07-07 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Mairead M Bartley; Yonas E Geda; Teresa J H Christianson; V Shane Pankratz; Rosebud O Roberts; Ronald C Petersen Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2016-01 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Iva Miljkovic; Allison L Kuipers; Jane A Cauley; Tanushree Prasad; Christine G Lee; Kristine E Ensrud; Peggy M Cawthon; Andrew R Hoffman; Thuy-Tien Dam; Christopher L Gordon; Joseph M Zmuda Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2015-04-02 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Holly Syddall; Helen C Roberts; Maria Evandrou; Cyrus Cooper; Howard Bergman; Avan Aihie Sayer Journal: Age Ageing Date: 2009-12-08 Impact factor: 10.668
Authors: Lies Lahousse; Bastiaan Maes; Gijsbertus Ziere; Daan W Loth; Vincentius J A Verlinden; M Carola Zillikens; André G Uitterlinden; Fernando Rivadeneira; Henning Tiemeier; Oscar H Franco; M Arfan Ikram; Albert Hofman; Guy G Brusselle; Bruno H Stricker Journal: Eur J Epidemiol Date: 2014-06-17 Impact factor: 8.082
Authors: J Bollwein; D Volkert; R Diekmann; M J Kaiser; W Uter; K Vidal; C C Sieber; J M Bauer Journal: J Nutr Health Aging Date: 2013-04 Impact factor: 4.075