Determinants of quality of life in community-dwelling older adults: comparing three cut-offs on the excellent-to-poor spectrum.

Details

Ressource 1Download: 2017 Henchoz_QualLifeRes.pdf (832.60 [Ko])
State: Public
Version: Author's accepted manuscript
Serval ID
serval:BIB_A51884B21EF7
Type
Article: article from journal or magazin.
Collection
Publications
Title
Determinants of quality of life in community-dwelling older adults: comparing three cut-offs on the excellent-to-poor spectrum.
Journal
Quality of life research
Author(s)
Henchoz Y., Botrugno F., Cornaz S., Büla C., Charef S., Santos-Eggimann B.
Working group(s)
Research Group on the quality of life of older people in cantons of Vaud and Geneva
Contributor(s)
Santos-Eggimann B., Büla C., Guessous I., Demont M., Rodondi N., Goy R.
ISSN
1573-2649 (Electronic)
ISSN-L
0962-9343
Publication state
Published
Issued date
02/2017
Peer-reviewed
Oui
Volume
26
Number
2
Pages
283-289
Language
english
Notes
Publication types: Journal Article
Publication Status: ppublish
Abstract
The aim of this study was to identify modifications in health, economic and social determinants of quality of life (QoL) in community-dwelling older adults when using different cut-offs to defining favorable QoL.
Data of year 2011 annual assessment in 1003 older men and women from the Lc65+ cohort study were used. Overall QoL was self-rated as 'excellent,' 'very good,' 'good,' 'fair,' or 'poor.' To identify significant health (self-rated health, SF-12v2 physical and mental health), economic (financial situation), and social (living with others, being socially supported, emotional support, group activities participation) determinants of QoL, a cut-off was set at three different positions to define favorable QoL on the 'excellent' to 'poor' spectrum: at least 'good' (model 1); at least 'very good' (model 2); and 'excellent' only (model 3).
In all three models, bivariable analyses indicated significant associations between QoL and at least one variable from each health, economic, and social dimension. In multivariable analyses, only health-related variables remained significantly associated with QoL in model 1. Model 3 additionally retained financial situation. In model 2, QoL was positively associated with physical health [odds ratio (OR) 1.10, p < 0.001], mental health (OR 1.12, p < 0.001), self-rated health (OR 2.43, p < 0.001), group activities participation (OR 1.43, p = 0.037), being socially supported (OR 1.58, p = 0.024), and not reporting financial difficulties (OR 1.76; p = 0.036).
Using different cut-offs to defining favorable QoL results in important changes in the number and type of significant health, economic and social determinants. A cut-off between 'good' and 'very good' appears to best reflect the multidimensional nature of QoL.

Keywords
Aged, Aging/psychology, Cohort Studies, Female, Humans, Male, Quality of Life/psychology, Residence Characteristics, Health, Older people, Quality of life, Socioeconomic factors
Pubmed
Web of science
Open Access
Yes
Create date
15/12/2016 15:24
Last modification date
20/08/2019 16:10
Usage data