Matthew D L O'Connell1,2,3, Megan M Marron1, Robert M Boudreau1, Mark Canney2, Jason L Sanders4, Rose Anne Kenny2, Stephen B Kritchevsky5, Tamara B Harris6, Anne B Newman1. 1. Center for Aging and Population Health, Department of Epidemiology, Graduate School of Public Health, University of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 2. The Irish Longitudinal Study on Ageing, Department of Medical Gerontology, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland. 3. Unit of Academic Primary Care, Division of Health Sciences, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK. 4. Department of Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston. 5. Sticht Center for Healthy Aging and Alzheimer's Prevention, Department of Internal Medicine, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina. 6. Laboratory of Epidemiology and Population Sciences, National Institute on Aging, Bethesda, Maryland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Baseline scores on a Healthy Aging Index (HAI), including five key physiologic domains, strongly predict health outcomes. This study aimed to characterize 9-year changes in a HAI and explore their relationship to subsequent mortality. METHODS: Data are from the Health, Aging, and Body Composition study of well-functioning adults aged 70-79 years. A HAI, which ranges from 0 to 10, was constructed at years 1 and 10 of the study including systolic blood pressure, forced expiratory volume, digit symbol substitution test, cystatin C, and fasting glucose. The relationships between the HAI at years 1 and 10 and the change between years and subsequent mortality until year 17 were estimated from Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Two thousand two hundred sixty-four participants had complete data on a HAI at year 1, of these 1,122 had complete data at year 10. HAI scores tended to increase (i.e. get worse) over 9-year follow-up, from (mean [SD]) 4.3 (2.1) to 5.7 (2.1); mean within-person change 1.5 (1.6). After multivariable adjustment, HAI score was related to mortality from year 1 (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval] = 1.17 [1.13-1.21] per unit) and year 10 (1.20 [1.14-1.27] per unit). The change between years was also related to mortality (1.08 [1.02-1.15] per unit change). CONCLUSIONS: HAI scores tended to increase with advancing age and stratified mortality rates among participants remaining at year 10. The HAI may prove useful to understand changes in health with aging.
BACKGROUND: Baseline scores on a Healthy Aging Index (HAI), including five key physiologic domains, strongly predict health outcomes. This study aimed to characterize 9-year changes in a HAI and explore their relationship to subsequent mortality. METHODS: Data are from the Health, Aging, and Body Composition study of well-functioning adults aged 70-79 years. A HAI, which ranges from 0 to 10, was constructed at years 1 and 10 of the study including systolic blood pressure, forced expiratory volume, digit symbol substitution test, cystatin C, and fasting glucose. The relationships between the HAI at years 1 and 10 and the change between years and subsequent mortality until year 17 were estimated from Cox proportional hazards models. RESULTS: Two thousand two hundred sixty-four participants had complete data on a HAI at year 1, of these 1,122 had complete data at year 10. HAI scores tended to increase (i.e. get worse) over 9-year follow-up, from (mean [SD]) 4.3 (2.1) to 5.7 (2.1); mean within-person change 1.5 (1.6). After multivariable adjustment, HAI score was related to mortality from year 1 (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval] = 1.17 [1.13-1.21] per unit) and year 10 (1.20 [1.14-1.27] per unit). The change between years was also related to mortality (1.08 [1.02-1.15] per unit change). CONCLUSIONS: HAI scores tended to increase with advancing age and stratified mortality rates among participants remaining at year 10. The HAI may prove useful to understand changes in health with aging.
Authors: Andrea L Rosso; Jason L Sanders; Alice M Arnold; Robert M Boudreau; Calvin H Hirsch; Michelle C Carlson; Caterina Rosano; Stephen B Kritchevsky; Anne B Newman Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2014-11-07 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Mark A Espeland; Eileen M Crimmins; Brandon R Grossardt; Jill P Crandall; Jonathan A L Gelfond; Tamara B Harris; Stephen B Kritchevsky; JoAnn E Manson; Jennifer G Robinson; Walter A Rocca; Marinella Temprosa; Fridtjof Thomas; Robert Wallace; Nir Barzilai Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2017-03-01 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: William R Swindell; Steven R Cummings; Jason L Sanders; Paolo Caserotti; Caterina Rosano; Suzanne Satterfield; Elsa S Strotmeyer; Tamara B Harris; Eleanor M Simonsick; Peggy M Cawthon Journal: Rejuvenation Res Date: 2012-05-18 Impact factor: 4.663
Authors: Ashish Yeri; Rachel A Murphy; Megan M Marron; Clary Clish; Tamara B Harris; Gregory D Lewis; Anne B Newman; Venkatesh L Murthy; Ravi V Shah Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2019-01-01 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Melissa Y Wei; Mohammed U Kabeto; Kenneth M Langa; Kenneth J Mukamal Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2018-01-16 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Alice M Arnold; Anne B Newman; Mary Cushman; Jingzhong Ding; Stephen Kritchevsky Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2009-04-22 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Anne B Newman; Robert M Boudreau; Barbara L Naydeck; Linda F Fried; Tamara B Harris Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2008-06 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Anne B Newman; Stephen B Kritchevsky; Jack M Guralnik; Steven R Cummings; Marcel Salive; George A Kuchel; Jennifer Schrack; Martha Clare Morris; David Weir; Andrea Baccarelli; Joanne M Murabito; Yoav Ben-Shlomo; Mark A Espeland; James Kirkland; David Melzer; Luigi Ferrucci Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2020-01-01 Impact factor: 6.591
Authors: Ivet Bayes-Marin; Albert Sanchez-Niubo; Daniel Fernández; Josep Maria Haro; Beatriz Olaya Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-07-28 Impact factor: 2.692