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

TitleDeterminants of quality of life in community-dwelling older adults: comparing three cut-offs on the excellent-to-poor spectrum.
Publication TypeJournal Article
Year of Publication2017
AuthorsHenchoz, Y, Botrugno, F, Cornaz, S, Büla, C, Charef, S, Santos-Eggimann, B
Corporate AuthorsResearch Group on the quality of life of older people in cantons of Vaud and Geneva
JournalQuality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation
Volume26
Issue2
Pagination283-289
Date Published02/2017
DOI10.1007/s11136-016-1394-3
ISSN1573-2649
KeywordsAged, Aging/psychology, Cohort Studies, Female, Health, Humans, Male, Older people, Quality of Life, Quality of Life/psychology, Residence Characteristics, Socioeconomic Factors
Abstract

PURPOSE: 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.

METHODS: 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).

RESULTS: 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).

CONCLUSIONS: 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.

Alternate URL

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27558783?dopt=Abstract

First publication date (online)

08/2016

WOS ID (UT)

000394145600004

Alternate JournalQual Life Res
Citation Key / SERVAL ID7113
Peer reviewRefereed
PubMed ID27558783

                         

IUMSP | www.iumsp.ch
Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine
Route de la Corniche 10, 1010 Lausanne - Switzerland
+41 21 314 72 72 | dess.info@unisante.ch

Go to top