OBJECTIVE: To determine whether mental health scores are associated with self-reported physical limitations after adjustment for physical performance. Patient-reported physical limitations are widely used to assess health status or the impact of disease. However, patients' mental health may influence their reports of their physical limitations. METHODS: Mental health and physical limitations were measured using the SF-36v2 mental health and physical functioning subscales in a cross-sectional study of 1024 participants. Physical performance was measured using tests of strength, endurance, dexterity, and flexibility. Multivariable linear regression was performed to examine the relationship between self-reported mental health and physical limitations adjusting for age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, body mass index, and measured physical performance. RESULTS: The score distributions for mental health and physical functioning were similar to that of the United States population in this age range. In unadjusted analyses, every 10-point decline in mental health scores was associated with a 4.8-point decline in physical functioning scores (95% Confidence Interval (CI) = -4.2 to -5.3; p < .001). After adjusting for covariables including measured physical performance, every 10-point decline in mental health scores was associated with a 3.0-point decline in physical functioning scores (95% CI = -2.5 to -3.6; p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: People with poor mental health scores seem to report more physical limitations than would be expected based on physical performance. When comparing self-reported physical limitations between groups, it is important to consider differences in mental health.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether mental health scores are associated with self-reported physical limitations after adjustment for physical performance. Patient-reported physical limitations are widely used to assess health status or the impact of disease. However, patients' mental health may influence their reports of their physical limitations. METHODS: Mental health and physical limitations were measured using the SF-36v2 mental health and physical functioning subscales in a cross-sectional study of 1024 participants. Physical performance was measured using tests of strength, endurance, dexterity, and flexibility. Multivariable linear regression was performed to examine the relationship between self-reported mental health and physical limitations adjusting for age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, body mass index, and measured physical performance. RESULTS: The score distributions for mental health and physical functioning were similar to that of the United States population in this age range. In unadjusted analyses, every 10-point decline in mental health scores was associated with a 4.8-point decline in physical functioning scores (95% Confidence Interval (CI) = -4.2 to -5.3; p < .001). After adjusting for covariables including measured physical performance, every 10-point decline in mental health scores was associated with a 3.0-point decline in physical functioning scores (95% CI = -2.5 to -3.6; p < .001). CONCLUSIONS:People with poor mental health scores seem to report more physical limitations than would be expected based on physical performance. When comparing self-reported physical limitations between groups, it is important to consider differences in mental health.
Authors: E M Simonsick; J D Kasper; J M Guralnik; K Bandeen-Roche; L Ferrucci; R Hirsch; S Leveille; T Rantanen; L P Fried Journal: J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci Date: 2001-01 Impact factor: 4.077
Authors: Jarmo J Malmberg; Seppo I Miilunpalo; Ilkka M Vuori; Matti E Pasanen; Pekka Oja; Nina A Haapanen-Niemi Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2002-05 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: C E Skotzko; C Krichten; G Zietowski; L Alves; R Freudenberger; S Robinson; M Fisher; S S Gottlieb Journal: J Card Fail Date: 2000-12 Impact factor: 5.712
Authors: Aartjan T F Beekman; Brenda W J H Penninx; Dorly J H Deeg; Edwin de Beurs; Sandra W Geerling; Willem van Tilburg Journal: Acta Psychiatr Scand Date: 2002-01 Impact factor: 6.392
Authors: K A Faulkner; J A Cauley; S A Studenski; D P Landsittel; S R Cummings; K E Ensrud; M G Donaldson; M C Nevitt Journal: Osteoporos Int Date: 2009-03-25 Impact factor: 4.507