Nick Freemantle1,2, Daniel Ray3, Milena Falcaro1, David McNulty2, Laura Shallcross3, John Wood1, Domenico Pagano2,4. 1. 1 Department of Primary Care and Population Health, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK. 2. 2 Quality and Outcomes Research Unit, University Hospital Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust, Birmingham B15 2PR, UK. 3. 3 FARR Institute of Health Informatics, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK. 4. 4 School of Clinic and Experimental Medicine, University of Birmingham, West Midlands B15 2TT, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Current advice for patients being discharged from hospital suggests a body mass index of 18.5 to 24 kgm-2, although this aspirational target may often not be achieved. We examined the relationship between body mass index on discharge from hospital and subsequent mortality over a maximum follow-up of 3.8 years. DESIGN: We conducted a survival analysis using linked hospital records data with national hospital episode statistics and national death certification data. PARTICIPANTS & SETTING: The analysis included adult patients who were admitted to University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust for a period of over 24 h during 2011, excluding day cases and regular day case attenders. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The relationship between body mass index and mortality at medium term was estimated separately in both men and women, after accounting for case-mix. RESULTS: For both males and females, the relationship between body mass index at discharge and the loge hazard of death was strongly non-linear (p = 0.0002 for females and p < 0.0001 for males) and predictive (both p < 0.0001). In all models, the optimal body mass index range associated with best survival was 25 to 35 kgm-2, with a sharp increase in risk for lower body mass index. CONCLUSIONS: There was little evidence to support current aspirational body mass index targets in the discharge population. Hospitals should ensure adequate nutrition especially among those with a reduced body mass index.
OBJECTIVE: Current advice for patients being discharged from hospital suggests a body mass index of 18.5 to 24 kgm-2, although this aspirational target may often not be achieved. We examined the relationship between body mass index on discharge from hospital and subsequent mortality over a maximum follow-up of 3.8 years. DESIGN: We conducted a survival analysis using linked hospital records data with national hospital episode statistics and national death certification data. PARTICIPANTS & SETTING: The analysis included adult patients who were admitted to University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust for a period of over 24 h during 2011, excluding day cases and regular day case attenders. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The relationship between body mass index and mortality at medium term was estimated separately in both men and women, after accounting for case-mix. RESULTS: For both males and females, the relationship between body mass index at discharge and the loge hazard of death was strongly non-linear (p = 0.0002 for females and p < 0.0001 for males) and predictive (both p < 0.0001). In all models, the optimal body mass index range associated with best survival was 25 to 35 kgm-2, with a sharp increase in risk for lower body mass index. CONCLUSIONS: There was little evidence to support current aspirational body mass index targets in the discharge population. Hospitals should ensure adequate nutrition especially among those with a reduced body mass index.
Authors: Amy Berrington de Gonzalez; Patricia Hartge; James R Cerhan; Alan J Flint; Lindsay Hannan; Robert J MacInnis; Steven C Moore; Geoffrey S Tobias; Hoda Anton-Culver; Laura Beane Freeman; W Lawrence Beeson; Sandra L Clipp; Dallas R English; Aaron R Folsom; D Michal Freedman; Graham Giles; Niclas Hakansson; Katherine D Henderson; Judith Hoffman-Bolton; Jane A Hoppin; Karen L Koenig; I-Min Lee; Martha S Linet; Yikyung Park; Gaia Pocobelli; Arthur Schatzkin; Howard D Sesso; Elisabete Weiderpass; Bradley J Willcox; Alicja Wolk; Anne Zeleniuch-Jacquotte; Walter C Willett; Michael J Thun Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-12-02 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Abel Romero-Corral; Victor M Montori; Virend K Somers; Josef Korinek; Randal J Thomas; Thomas G Allison; Farouk Mookadam; Francisco Lopez-Jimenez Journal: Lancet Date: 2006-08-19 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Sun Ha Jee; Jae Woong Sull; Jungyong Park; Sang-Yi Lee; Heechoul Ohrr; Eliseo Guallar; Jonathan M Samet Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2006-08-22 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Kenneth F Adams; Arthur Schatzkin; Tamara B Harris; Victor Kipnis; Traci Mouw; Rachel Ballard-Barbash; Albert Hollenbeck; Michael F Leitzmann Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2006-08-22 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: A Romero-Corral; V K Somers; J Sierra-Johnson; R J Thomas; M L Collazo-Clavell; J Korinek; T G Allison; J A Batsis; F H Sert-Kuniyoshi; F Lopez-Jimenez Journal: Int J Obes (Lond) Date: 2008-02-19 Impact factor: 5.095
Authors: Tung Wai Auyeung; Jenny S W Lee; Jason Leung; Timothy Kwok; Ping Chung Leung; Jean Woo Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2009-07-23 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: A Avenell; J Broom; T J Brown; A Poobalan; L Aucott; S C Stearns; W C S Smith; R T Jung; M K Campbell; A M Grant Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2004-05 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Christina Avgerinou; Cini Bhanu; Kate Walters; Helen Croker; Ann Liljas; Jennifer Rea; Yehudit Bauernfreund; Maggie Kirby-Barr; Jane Hopkins; Amber Appleton; Kalpa Kharicha Journal: Nutrients Date: 2019-06-05 Impact factor: 5.717
Authors: Christina Avgerinou; Cini Bhanu; Kate Walters; Helen Croker; Remco Tuijt; Jennifer Rea; Jane Hopkins; Maggie Kirby-Barr; Kalpa Kharicha Journal: Br J Gen Pract Date: 2020-01-30 Impact factor: 5.386
Authors: Patrick Rockenschaub; Martin J Gill; David McNulty; Orlagh Carroll; Nick Freemantle; Laura Shallcross Journal: Diagn Progn Res Date: 2020-09-16