| Literature DB >> 33916422 |
Catarina Caçador1, Edite Teixeira-Lemos2, Jorge Oliveira2, João Pinheiro3, Filipa Mascarenhas-Melo4, Fernando Ramos1,5.
Abstract
Demographic aging of the population allied with the new family structures and societal dynamics is generating an increasing demand for institutions for older adults. Nutritional status is a key health determinant that impacts the quality of life among older adults. Hence, the aim of the present study was to evaluate the relationship between nutritional status and nutritional risk, functional capacity, and cognition in institutionalised Portuguese older adults by a cross-sectional study in 15 institutions. Nutritional status (body mass index (BMI), waist circumference (WC), nutritional risk (mini nutritional assessment (MNA)), degree of functional independence (Barthel index (BI)), and cognitive ability (mini mental state examination (MMSE)) were assessed. Of the 214 older adults evaluated, 28.0% were at risk of malnutrition, 69.6% were mildly functional dependent, and 39.3% presented minor cognitive impairment. The risk of malnutrition increased functional dependence and cognitive impairment. The MNA score, but not the BMI or WC, was related to disability and deficits in cognition. A differential interdependence was found between nutritional, cognitive, and functional status. Strategies to improve self-care and well-being in nursing homes should consider a correct diet and a closer evaluation of nutritional risk to preserve cognition, independence, and autonomy.Entities:
Keywords: Portugal; cognition; exercise; nursing homes; nutrition; older adults
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33916422 PMCID: PMC8038576 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18073789
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Population demographics, nutritional, functional, and cognitive characteristics by gender.
| Variables | Total | Female | Male | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Educational Status | ||||
| Illiterate | 79 (36.9) | 60 (39.0) | 19 (31.7) | 0.549 |
| 1–11 years | 124 (57.9) | 87 (56.5) | 37 (61.7) | |
| >11 years | 11 (5.1) | 7 (4.5) | 4 (6.7) | |
| Civil Status | ||||
| Single | 25 (11.7) | 20 (13.0) | 5 (8.8) | 0.004 |
| Married | 30 (14.0) | 14 (9.1) | 16 (26.7) | |
| W/S/D | 159 (74.3) | 120 (77.9) | 39 (65.0) | |
| WC | ||||
| Normal | 132 (61.7) | 100 (64.9) | 32 (53.3) | 0.080 |
| High risk | 82 (38.3) | 54 (35.1) | 28 (46.7) | |
| BMI | ||||
| Underweight | 16 (7.5) | 10 (6.6) | 6 (10.0) | 0.680 |
| Normal | 74 (34.6) | 54 (35.1) | 20 (33.3) | |
| Overweight | 124 (57.9) | 90 (58.4) | 34 (56.7) | |
| MNA | ||||
| At risk of malnutrition | 60 (28.0) | 48 (31.2) | 12 (20.0) | 0.102 |
| Normal nutritional status | 154 (72.0) | 106 (68.8) | 48 (80.0) | |
| BI | ||||
| Partially dependent | 14 (6.5) | 11 (7.1) | 3 (5.0) | 0.739 |
| Minimally dependent | 149 (69.6) | 108 (70.1) | 41 (68.3) | |
| Independent | 51 (23.8) | 35 (22.7) | 16 (26.7) | |
| MMSE | ||||
| Cognitive impairment | 84 (39.3) | 69 (44.8) | 15 (25.0) | 0.008 |
| Without cognitive impairment | 130 (60.7) | 85 (55.2) | 45 (75.0) |
W/S/D, widow/separated/divorced; WC, waist circumference; BMI, body mass index; MNA, mini nutritional assessment; BI, Barthel index; MMSE, mini mental state examination. In brackets are the percentages: statistical comparisons between genders.
Age effects on nutritional status, nutritional risk, self-dependence in activities of daily living, and cognitive status.
| Variables | Age Groups | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 65–76 | 77–86 | 87–99 | ||
| MNA | ||||
| At risk of malnutrition | 10 (16.7) | 33 (55.0) | 17 (28.3) | 0.599 |
| Normal nutritional status | 35 (22.7) | 81 (52.6) | 38 (24.7) | |
| BMI | ||||
| Underweight | 1 (6.3) | 8 (50.0) | 7 (43.8) | 0.225 |
| Normal | 20 (27.0) | 37 (50.0) | 17 (23.0) | |
| Overweight | 24 (19.4) | 69 (55.6) | 31 (25.0) | |
| WC | ||||
| Normal | 29 (22.0) | 64 (48.5) | 39 (29.5) | 0.165 |
| High risk | 16 (19.5) | 50 (61.0) | 16 (19.5) | |
| BI | ||||
| Partially dependent | 3 (21.4) | 8 (57.1) | 3 (21.4) | 0.943 |
| Minimally dependent | 10 (24.4) | 22 (53.7) | 9 (22.0) | |
| Independent | 32 (20.1) | 84 (52.8) | 43 (27.0) | |
| MMSE | ||||
| Cognitive impairment | 20 (23.8) | 43 (51.2) | 21 (25.0) | 0.723 |
| Without cognitive impairment | 25 (19.2) | 71 (54.6) | 34 (26.2) | |
MNA, mini nutritional assessment; BMI, body mass index; WC, waist circumference; BI, Barthel index; MMSE, mini mental state examination.
Participants’ nutritional risk and functioning based on their BMI categorisation.
| Variables | BMI | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Underweight | Normal | Overweight | ||
| MNA | 21.8 ± 2.5 a | 25.0 ± 2.0 b | 25.3 ± 2.2 b | <0.001 |
| BI | 74.7 ± 18.5 a | 84.8 ± 15.7 b | 86.0 ± 14.4 b | 0.021 |
| MMSE | 19.0 ± 5.6 | 21.1 ± 4.9 | 21.1 ± 5.3 | 0.295 |
MNA, mini nutritional assessment score; BI, Barthel index; MMSE, mini mental state examination. a,b Values in rows with different superscripts are significantly different.
Participants’ nutritional status and functioning based on their MNA categorisation.
| Variables | MNA | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| At Risk | Well Nourished | ||
| BMI (kg/m2) | 27.1 ± 5.6 | 28.8 ± 4.5 | 0.018 |
| BI | 77.0 ± 17.8 | 87.7 ± 13.2 | <0.001 |
| MMSE | 19.3 ± 5.6 | 21.6 ± 4.9 | 0.003 |
MNA: mini nutritional assessment; BMI: body mass index; BI: Barthel index; MMSE: mini mental state examination; WC: waist circumference.
Correlation between nutritional status, nutritional risk, and functional and mental disability.
| Variables | BMI | WC | MMSE | BI | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MNA | 0.28 | (<0.001) | 0.13 | (0.059) | 0.30 | (<0.001) | 0.40 | (<0.001) |
| BMI | 0.72 | (0.715) | 0.08 | (0.239) | 0.09 | (0.169) | ||
| WC | 0.01 | (0.899) | −0.04 | (0.572) | ||||
| MMSE | 0.35 | (<0.001) | ||||||
MNA: mini nutritional assessment; BMI: body mass index; BI: Barthel index; MMSE: mini mental state examination; WC: waist circumference. (In brackets are the p-values).