Skip to main content

Table 2 Summary statistics for clinical, physical and cognitive factors at Wave 4 and relative risks of incident falls between Waves 4 and 6 according to these characteristics among 1515 men and 1783 women aged 60 and over

From: Risk factors for incident falls in older men and women: the English longitudinal study of ageing

Characteristic

Men

Women

N (%)

Relative risk (95% CI)

P-value

N (%)

Relative risk (95% CI)

P-value

Number of comorbiditiesb

1 (0, 2)

1.10 (1.06,1.14)

< 0.001

2 (1, 2)

1.07 (1.04,1.11)

< 0.001

Hearingc

 Excellent

195 (12.9%)

1.08 (1.02,1.13)

0.006

361 (20.2%)

1.05 (1.00,1.09)

0.054

 Very good

369 (24.4%)

538 (30.2%)

 Good

551 (36.4%)

614 (34.4%)

 Fair

312 (20.6%)

224 (12.6%)

 Poor

88 (5.8%)

46 (2.6%)

Eyesightc

 Excellent

255 (16.8%)

1.12 (1.06,1.19)

< 0.001

244 (13.7%)

1.08 (1.03,1.13)

0.002

 Very good

558 (36.8%)

605 (33.9%)

 Good

547 (36.1%)

726 (40.7%)

 Fair

136 (9%)

157 (8.8%)

 Poor/blind

19 (1.3%)

51 (2.9%)

Incontinenced

116 (7.7%)

1.29 (1.11,1.51)

0.001

391 (21.9%)

1.20 (1.09,1.33)

< 0.001

Troubled by painc

 None

1010 (66.7%)

1.15 (1.09,1.21)

< 0.001

1013 (56.8%)

1.09 (1.04,1.13)

< 0.001

 Mild

190 (12.5%)

193 (10.8%)

 Moderate

250 (16.5%)

430 (24.1%)

 Severe

65 (4.3%)

147 (8.2%)

CES-Depression scoreb

0 (0, 1)

1.07 (1.04,1.10)

< 0.001

1 (0, 2)

1.05 (1.03,1.08)

< 0.001

Full-tandem stand

  ≥ 10 s if aged ≥70/≥30 s if aged < 70

1266 (83.6%)

1.00

< 0.001

1324 (74.3%)

1.00

< 0.001

  < 10 s if aged ≥70/< 30 s if aged < 70

172 (11.4%)

1.28 (1.09,1.49)

299 (16.8%)

1.16 (1.03,1.31)

Not attempted

77 (5.1%)

1.58 (1.36,1.84)

160 (9.0%)

1.31 (1.15,1.49)

 

Frailty status

 Not frail

889 (58.7%)

1.00

< 0.001

984 (55.2%)

1.00

< 0.001

 Pre-frail

537 (35.4%)

1.27 (1.12,1.44)

641 (36%)

1.14 (1.03,1.26)

 Frail

89 (5.9%)

1.66 (1.42,1.94)

158 (8.9%)

1.35 (1.18,1.54)

Forced expiratory volume (litres)a

2.8 (0.8)

0.91 (0.86,0.96)

0.001

1.9 (0.5)

0.93 (0.89,0.97)

0.001

Cognitiona

−0.06 (0.89)

0.91 (0.86,0.96)

0.001

0.08 (0.88)

0.94 (0.90,0.98)

0.008

  1. P-value for difference in risk of falling between categories shown for full-tandem stand and frailty status
  2. Poisson regression models with robust variance estimation were used to yield relative risks
  3. Relative risk estimates were adjusted for previous falls before Wave 4
  4. aMean (SD) for summary statistics and relative risks correspond to SD increases
  5. bMedian (lower quartile, upper quartile) for summary statistic and relative risks correspond to unit increases
  6. cRelative risk per higher category
  7. dRelative risk for presence vs absence
Back to article page

BMC Geriatrics

ISSN: 1471-2318

Contact us