Charlotte Bimou1,2,3,4, Michel Harel5, Cécile Laubarie-Mouret6,7, Noëlle Cardinaud6,8, Marion Charenton-Blavignac6,8, Nassima Toumi6,7, Justine Trimouillas6, Caroline Gayot6, Sophie Boyer6,8,7, Réjean Hebert9, Thierry Dantoine6,8, Achille Tchalla6,8,7. 1. CHU de Limoges, Pôle HU Gérontologie Clinique, Service de Médecine Gériatrique, Unité de Prévention de Suivi et d'Analyse du Vieillissement (UPSAV), CHU Limoges, 2 Avenue Martin-Luther King, F-87042, Limoges, France. cbimou@gmail.com. 2. Université de Limoges; EA 6310 HAVAE Handicap Activité Vieillissement Autonomie Environnement, F-8705, Limoges, France. cbimou@gmail.com. 3. Unité de Recherche Clinique et de l'Innovation en Gérontologie (URCI), Hôpital Jean Rebeyrol, CHU de Limoges, 87042, Limoges, France. cbimou@gmail.com. 4. HAVAE Laboratory, University of Limoges, 123 avenue Albert Thomas, F-87060, Limoges, France. cbimou@gmail.com. 5. Institut de Mathématiques de Toulouse et École Supérieure du Professorat et de l'Éducation à l'Université de Limoges, 87000, Limoges, France. 6. CHU de Limoges, Pôle HU Gérontologie Clinique, Service de Médecine Gériatrique, Unité de Prévention de Suivi et d'Analyse du Vieillissement (UPSAV), CHU Limoges, 2 Avenue Martin-Luther King, F-87042, Limoges, France. 7. Unité de Recherche Clinique et de l'Innovation en Gérontologie (URCI), Hôpital Jean Rebeyrol, CHU de Limoges, 87042, Limoges, France. 8. Université de Limoges; EA 6310 HAVAE Handicap Activité Vieillissement Autonomie Environnement, F-8705, Limoges, France. 9. Université de Montreal, Québec, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Independence is related to the aging process. Loss of independence is defined as the inability to make decisions and participate in activities of daily living (ADLs). Independence is related to physical, psychological, biological, and socioeconomic factors. An enhanced understanding of older people's independence trajectories and associated risk factors would enable the develop early intervention strategies. METHODS: Independence trajectory analysis was performed on patients identified in the Unité de Prévention de Suivi et d'Analyse du Vieillissement (UPSAV) database. UPSAV cohort is a prospective observational study. Participants were 221 community-dwelling persons aged ≥75 years followed for 24 months between July 2011-November 2013 and benefits from a prevention strategy. Data were collected prospectively using a questionnaire. Independence was assessed using the "Functional Autonomy Measurement System (Système de Mesure de l'Autonomie Fonctionnelle (SMAF))". Group-based trajectory modeling (GBTM) was performed to identify independence trajectories, and the results were compared with those of k-means and hierarchical ascending classifications. A multinomial logistic regression was performed to identify predictive factors of the independence trajectory. RESULTS: Three distinct trajectories of independence were identified including a "Stable functional autonomy (SFA) trajectory" (53% of patients), a "Stable then decline functional autonomy decline (SDFA) trajectory" (33% of patients) and a "Constantly functional autonomy decline (CFAD) trajectory" (14% of patients). Not being a member of an association, and previous fall were significantly associated of a SDFA trajectory (P < 0.01). Absence of financial and human assistance, no hobbies, and cognitive disorder were significantly associated with a CFAD trajectory (P < 0.01). Previous occupation and multiple pathologies were predictive factors of both declining trajectories SDFA and CFAD. CONCLUSIONS: Community-living older persons exhibit distinct independence trajectories and the predictive factors. The evidence from this study suggests that the prevention and screening for the loss of independence of the older adults should be anticipated to maintaining autonomy.
BACKGROUND: Independence is related to the aging process. Loss of independence is defined as the inability to make decisions and participate in activities of daily living (ADLs). Independence is related to physical, psychological, biological, and socioeconomic factors. An enhanced understanding of older people's independence trajectories and associated risk factors would enable the develop early intervention strategies. METHODS: Independence trajectory analysis was performed on patients identified in the Unité de Prévention de Suivi et d'Analyse du Vieillissement (UPSAV) database. UPSAV cohort is a prospective observational study. Participants were 221 community-dwelling persons aged ≥75 years followed for 24 months between July 2011-November 2013 and benefits from a prevention strategy. Data were collected prospectively using a questionnaire. Independence was assessed using the "Functional Autonomy Measurement System (Système de Mesure de l'Autonomie Fonctionnelle (SMAF))". Group-based trajectory modeling (GBTM) was performed to identify independence trajectories, and the results were compared with those of k-means and hierarchical ascending classifications. A multinomial logistic regression was performed to identify predictive factors of the independence trajectory. RESULTS: Three distinct trajectories of independence were identified including a "Stable functional autonomy (SFA) trajectory" (53% of patients), a "Stable then decline functional autonomy decline (SDFA) trajectory" (33% of patients) and a "Constantly functional autonomy decline (CFAD) trajectory" (14% of patients). Not being a member of an association, and previous fall were significantly associated of a SDFA trajectory (P < 0.01). Absence of financial and human assistance, no hobbies, and cognitive disorder were significantly associated with a CFAD trajectory (P < 0.01). Previous occupation and multiple pathologies were predictive factors of both declining trajectories SDFA and CFAD. CONCLUSIONS: Community-living older persons exhibit distinct independence trajectories and the predictive factors. The evidence from this study suggests that the prevention and screening for the loss of independence of the older adults should be anticipated to maintaining autonomy.
Entities:
Keywords:
Functional decline; Independence; Older adults; Optimal number of groups; Prevention; Semi-parametric model; Trajectory
Authors: J M Guralnik; L Ferrucci; C F Pieper; S G Leveille; K S Markides; G V Ostir; S Studenski; L F Berkman; R B Wallace Journal: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci Date: 2000-04 Impact factor: 6.053
Authors: L P Fried; R A Kronmal; A B Newman; D E Bild; M B Mittelmark; J F Polak; J A Robbins; J M Gardin Journal: JAMA Date: 1998-02-25 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Nini H Jonkman; Vieri Del Panta; Trynke Hoekstra; Marco Colpo; Natasja M van Schoor; Stefania Bandinelli; Luca Cattelani; Jorunn L Helbostad; Beatrix Vereijken; Mirjam Pijnappels; Andrea B Maier Journal: Gerontology Date: 2017-12-13 Impact factor: 5.140
Authors: Sari Stenholm; Hugo Westerlund; Paula Salo; Martin Hyde; Jaana Pentti; Jenny Head; Mika Kivimäki; Jussi Vahtera Journal: J Epidemiol Community Health Date: 2014-02-17 Impact factor: 3.710
Authors: Ángel Denche-Zamorano; Laura Muñoz-Bermejo; Jorge Carlos-Vivas; María Mendoza-Muñoz; Juan Manuel Franco-García; Jorge Rojo-Ramos; Alejandro Vega-Muñoz; Nicolás Contreras-Barraza; Sabina Barrios-Fernandez Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-04-27 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Anne-Julie Tessier; Julia Lévy-Ndejuru; Audrey Moyen; Marissa Lawson; Marie Lamarche; Joseé A Morais; Amritpal Bhullar; Francis Andriamampionona; Vera C Mazurak; Stéphanie Chevalier Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-08-23 Impact factor: 3.240