Elizabeth Vásquez1, Cassandra M Germain2, Fei Tang1, Matthew C Lohman3,4, Karen L Fortuna3,4, John A Batsis3,4,5. 1. University at Albany, Rensselaer, NY, USA. 2. School of Nursing Family University of North Carolina, Greensboro, USA. 3. Geisel School of 004Dedicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, NH, USA. 4. Dartmouth Centers for Health and Aging, Dartmouth College, Hanover, New Hampshire. 5. The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy & Clinical Practice, Lebanon, NH, USA.
Abstract
Objective: To compare estimates of the prevalence of mobility and physical function limitations by race and ethnicity using data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS). Method: The sample comprised of 28,854 adults aged ≥60 from the MEPS (2004-2013). Physical function (limitations in basic and instrumental activities of daily living [ADL/IADL]) and mobility limitations were assessed by self-report. Results: Non-Hispanic Whites (NHWs) represented the majority of the sample followed by non-Hispanic Blacks (NHBs), Hispanic and non-Hispanic Other (Other). For mobility limitation, NHBs had the highest prevalence followed by NHWs and Hispanics (33.3%, 28.6%, and 26.2%, respectively). Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed for the primary outcome of mobility limitation. In the adjusted model, Hispanics had lower odds of mobility limitations (prevalence odds ratio [POR]: 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.67,0.91]) compared with NHWs. For ADL limitations, NHBs had higher odds of having ADLs (POR: 1.87; 95% CI = [1.44, 2.44]) when compared with NHWs. Conclusion: This article evaluated the influence of race and ethnicity, on the prevalence of mobility and functional limitations that are not always consistent with expected racial and ethnic differences.
Objective: To compare estimates of the prevalence of mobility and physical function limitations by race and ethnicity using data from the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey (MEPS). Method: The sample comprised of 28,854 adults aged ≥60 from the MEPS (2004-2013). Physical function (limitations in basic and instrumental activities of daily living [ADL/IADL]) and mobility limitations were assessed by self-report. Results: Non-Hispanic Whites (NHWs) represented the majority of the sample followed by non-Hispanic Blacks (NHBs), Hispanic and non-Hispanic Other (Other). For mobility limitation, NHBs had the highest prevalence followed by NHWs and Hispanics (33.3%, 28.6%, and 26.2%, respectively). Multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed for the primary outcome of mobility limitation. In the adjusted model, Hispanics had lower odds of mobility limitations (prevalence odds ratio [POR]: 0.78; 95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.67,0.91]) compared with NHWs. For ADL limitations, NHBs had higher odds of having ADLs (POR: 1.87; 95% CI = [1.44, 2.44]) when compared with NHWs. Conclusion: This article evaluated the influence of race and ethnicity, on the prevalence of mobility and functional limitations that are not always consistent with expected racial and ethnic differences.
Authors: Elizabeth P Handing; Stephen R Rapp; Shyh-Huei Chen; W Jack Rejeski; Marie Wiberg; Karen Bandeen-Roche; Suzanne Craft; Dalane Kitzman; Edward H Ip Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2021-03-31 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: Brittney S Lange-Maia; Aron S Buchman; Sue E Leurgans; Melissa Lamar; Elizabeth B Lynch; Kristine M Erlandson; Lisa L Barnes Journal: J Racial Ethn Health Disparities Date: 2021-08-17
Authors: Edward H Ip; Shyh-Huei Chen; W Jack Rejeski; Karen Bandeen-Roche; Kathleen M Hayden; Christina E Hugenschmidt; June Pierce; Michael E Miller; Jaime L Speiser; Stephen B Kritchevsky; Denise K Houston; Robert L Newton; Stephen R Rapp; Dalane W Kitzman Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2022-08-12 Impact factor: 6.591