Skip to main content

Table 5 Population characteristics between Beijing urban, Beijing rural and Hong Kong – age 85+

From: Prevalence of frailty and contributory factors in three Chinese populations with different socioeconomic and healthcare characteristics

 

Mean (sd)/Freq (%)

Beijing urban (1)

Beijing rural (2)a

Hong Kong (3)a

Male

N = 114

N = 5

N = 43

 Age, mean (sd)

87.01 (2.51)

87.30 (5.38)

86.89 (3.00)

 Currently married

76 (66.67 %)

3 (57.02 %)

29 (68.42 %)

 Education ≤ Middle school

43 (37.72 %)

4 (85.96 %)1

31 (72.63 %)1

 Living alone

16 (14.04 %)

0 (0 %)

7 (16.49 %)

 Current smoking

15 (13.16 %)

1 (21.49 %)

6 (14.74 %)

 Current alcohol useb

15 (13.16 %)

1 (21.49 %)

5 (11.58 %)

 Daily exercise < 0.5 h

33 (28.95 %)

0 (0 %)

10 (24.56 %)

 No. of diseases

   

  0

30 (26.32 %)

3 (64.47 %)

9 (20 %)

  1-2

56 (49.12 %)

1 (21.49 %)

24 (56.84 %)

  ≥ 3

28 (24.56 %)

1 (14.04 %)

10 (23.16 %)

 Daily drugs ≥ 4

33 (30.28 %)

0 (0 %)

3 (7.37 %)1

 GDS ≥ 8

13 (12.04 %)

0 (0 %)

7 (16.49 %)

 MMSE < 24

23 (20.18 %)

2 (35.53 %)

16 (36.49 %)1

Female

N = 125

N = 3

N = 58

 Age, mean (sd)

87.74 (2.55)

86.50 (1.52)

87.39 (3.04)

 Currently married

38 (30.40 %)

0 (0 %)

5 (7.92 %)1

 Education ≤ Middle school

81 (65.32 %)

3 (100 %)

52 (90.5 %)1

 Living alone

20 (16.00 %)

0 (0 %)

13 (21.49 %)

 Current smoking

5 (4.00 %)

3 (100 %)1

1 (1.58 %)2

 Current alcohol useb

1 (0.80 %)

1 (33.33 %)1

0 (0 %)2

 Daily exercise < 0.5 h

51 (41.13 %)

0 (0 %)

31 (55.43 %)

 No. of diseases

   

  0

26 (20.80 %)

1 (33.33 %)

6 (9.5 %)

  1–2

60 (48.00 %)

2 (66.67 %)

34 (59.28 %)

  ≥ 3

39 (31.20 %)

0 (0 %)

18 (31.22 %)

 Daily drugs ≥ 4

30 (25.21 %)

0 (0 %)

6 (10.41 %)1

 GDS ≥ 8

29 (24.58 %)

0 (0 %)

11 (18.33 %)

 MMSE < 24

52 (41.94 %)

3 (100 %)1

35 (59.95 %)1

  1. apercentage in Beijing rural and Hong Kong is standardized using 5-year interval of Beijing urban population
  2. bcurrent alcohol use: drink >12 alcoholic drinks in past 12 months
  3. 1 p-value < 0.05, comparing Beijing rural (2) or Hong Kong (3) with Beijing urban (1)
  4. 2 p-value < 0.05, comparing Hong Kong (3) with Beijing rural (2)