The Social Environment’s Relationship With Frailty: Evidence From Existing Studies

Duppen, Daan; Elst, Michaël Van der; Dury, Sarah; Lambotte, Deborah; Donder, Liesbeth De; D-Scope,

doi:10.1177/0733464816688310

Cited by 72 publications

(77 citation statements)

References 61 publications

(130 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…We highlighted that these experiences of implicit negative AS should be identified and intervened within campaign to combat ageism because of overwhelming evidence indicating their negative health influence [11]. The determinants of frailty included a variety of physiological changes and/or diseases associated with ageing [50], and several psychological, social and environmental factors in previous studies [55][56][57][58]. However, we also emphasized that such a common but overlooked factor of ageism should be taken seriously in the process of frailty.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How does ageism influence frailty? A preliminary study using a structural equation model

Gao

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: Based on the Stereotype Embodiment Theory (SET), this study aims to examine the mechanism of ageism on frailty through the proposed framework of "Experiences of Ageism (EA) → Age Stereotypes (AS) → Attitudes to ageing (AA) → Frailty" using a structural equation model (SEM). Methods: A community-based study involving 630 participants aged 60 years and older was conducted in Shanghai. EA, AS, AA and frailty status were assessed by validated scales. In particular, EA included three parts in this study, as the first part was the experiences of explicit prejudice or discrimination because of age, another two parts were the experiences of witnessed and encountered implicit negative age-based stereotypes. A SEM was performed to examine whether the proposed paths from EA to frailty were supported. Results: EA had a significant indirect effect (β'=.344×-.365×-.333=.023, p<.001) on frailty through the path of "EA → AS → AA → Frailty" after controlling for covariates. AA had a direct effect (β=-.337, p<.001) on frailty; AS fully mediated the association between EA and AA (indirect effect=.344×-.365=-.126, p<.001), and AA fully mediated the association between AS and frailty (indirect effect=-.365×-.333=.122, p<.001). Conclusions: These findings demonstrated a mechanism from ageism to frailty, and highlighted the potential threat of negative AS on health. Ageism and frailty are both great challenges for the process of healthy ageing.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

How does ageism influence frailty? A preliminary study using a structural equation model

Gao

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, SP is critical to the social environment, a broad concept that also includes social networks, social support, and neighborhood characteristics. There is evidence that a good social environment has a beneficial effect on frailty in later life, meaning that mortality could be reduced by ensuring that elders obtain health-related resources [51].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Frailty index–predicted mortality is moderated by health-related behaviors: a 4-year community-based longitudinal-cohort study

Huang¹,

Chen

Bo³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To explore the separate and joint associations between frailty and long-term, all-cause mortality with health-related behaviors in older adults. We enrolled a total of 4050 community residents age ≥60 years from Songjiang District, Shanghai, China, and followed up with them every year from 2015 to 2018.Based on the standard procedure for creating an FI, we developed one containing 28 measured variables. Survival analyses were used to examine the risk ratios (RRs) between frailty and 4-year mortality; hazard ratios (HRs) were obtained and adjusted for gender and age. Over an average follow-up time of 1107.56 ± 144.43 days, 216 (5.4%) participants died. Of all participants, 71.7% were non-frail (FI = 0–0.1), 23.2% were pre-frail (FI = 0.1–0.2), and 5.1% were frail (FI ³0.2). Multivariate HRs (with 95% confidence intervals [CIs]) for all-cause mortality were 1.58 (1.06–2.34) and 2.63 (1.52 –4.55) for moderate (FI 0.1–0.2) and severe (FI >0.2) frailty, respectively, compared with mild frailty (<0.1). Risk of death for severely frail participants who were physically inactive (HR = 3.40; 95% CI, 1.78–6.50; P < 0.001) was 105%, much higher than for severely frail participants who performed physical exercise (HR = 2.34; 95% CI, 1.35–4.09; P < 0.01). Similarly, among severely frail participants, those who were socially inactive (HR = 5.77; 95% CI, 2.69–12.38; P < 0.01) were 344% more likely to die than those who regularly participated in social activities (HR = 2.33; 95% CI, 1.42–3.86; P < 0.01).

show abstract

“…29 Moreover, social participation and factors such as security, strong social cohesion and neighborhood belongingness 29 are protective and provide balance in community frailty levels. 30 Another frailty predictor is poor physical performance (4-6 points), as assessed using the SPPB. An Italian study with a mean follow-up period of 4.4 years found that poor physical performance (score lower than 8 points) was significantly associated with increased risk of becoming frail and with worsening frailty status.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Frailty-associated factors among Brazilian community-dwelling elderly people: longitudinal study

Pegorari

Tavares

2019

Sao Paulo Med. J.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: Frailty among elderly people is associated with negative health outcomes. Through gaining better understanding of this syndrome over different time periods, healthcare actions that take predictive factors into consideration may be facilitated. OBJECTIVE: To identify factors associated with frailty syndrome among community-dwelling elderly people over a two-year follow-up. DESIGN AND SETTING: Longitudinal study on elderly people living in Uberaba (MG), Brazil. METHODS: Elderly individuals were selected through multiple-stage conglomerate sampling from a national database. Participants were interviewed and evaluated in 2014 and again in 2016. Predictors were considered at the baseline, and frailty categories (frail, pre-frail or non-frail) at the follow-up. Frailty was identified based on the Fried criteria. Associations with socioeconomic factors, health status and physical performance were investigated using multinomial logistic regression. RESULTS: 353 individuals participated in both assessments. The final model showed that age over 80 years was predictive of both pre-frailty and frailty (odds ratio, OR 4.92; 95% confidence interval, CI: 1.57-15.38; OR 8.64; 95% CI: 2.05-36.35, respectively), while dependency regarding basic activities of daily living (OR 3.66; 95% CI: 1.22-11.02) and poor lower-limb physical performance (OR 7.87; 95% CI: 1.97-31.39) predicted frailty. A one-unit increased score for advanced activities of daily living decreased the frailty rate by 15% (OR 0.85; 95% CI: 0.74-0.99). CONCLUSION: Age over 80 years was predictive of pre-frailty and frailty, while dependency in basic activities of daily living and poor physical performance predicted frailty. A one-unit increased score for advanced activities of daily living decreased the frailty rate by 15%.

show abstract

The Social Environment’s Relationship With Frailty: Evidence From Existing Studies

Cited by 72 publications

References 61 publications

How does ageism influence frailty? A preliminary study using a structural equation model

How does ageism influence frailty? A preliminary study using a structural equation model

Frailty index–predicted mortality is moderated by health-related behaviors: a 4-year community-based longitudinal-cohort study

Frailty-associated factors among Brazilian community-dwelling elderly people: longitudinal study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About