Skip to main content

Table 3 Multivariate Cox proportional hazard analysis with 1-year mortality

From: Comparison of the adequacy of geriatric nutritional risk index with that of the mini nutritional assessment-short form and global leadership initiative on malnutrition criteria in assessing nutritional status to predict the 1-year prognosis of hospitalized Japanese older adults: a single-institutional cohort study

 

Death

n = 43

Crude HR

P value

Adjusted HR

model 1

P value

Adjusted HR

model 2

P value

Adjusted HR

model 3

P value

Age: 85

26 (60.5)

1.49 (0.81–2.75)

0.201

1.30 (0.66–2.56)

0.449

1.30 (0.65–2.56)

0.458

1.24 (0.62–2.51)

0.542

Sex: Women

27 (62.8)

0.61 (0.33–1.13)

0.117

0.54 (0.27–1.09)

0.087

0.53 (0.26–1.09)

0.083

0.50 (0.24–1.03)

0.061

Care level

 independent

8 (19.0)

        

 Support care

3 (7.1)

0.89 (0.24–3.35)

0.862

      

 1, 2

19 (45.2)

3.46 (1.51–7.90)

0.003

      

3

12 (28.6)

3.26 (1.33–7.99)

0.010

      

 Missing

1

        
  

Trend p = 0.001

       

Prehospital situation

 Home (Alone)

3 (7.0)

        

 Home (Others)

25 (58.1)

0.18 (0.05–0.61)

0.006

0.38 (0.10–1.42)

0.149

0.36 (0.10–1.34)

0.129

0.78 (0.19–3.19)

0.734

 Nursing home

15 (34.9)

0.38 (0.20–0.73)

0.003

0.53 (0.26–1.10)

0.089

0.52 (0.26–1.04)

0.066

0.91 (0.40–2.10)

0.829

  

Trend p = 0.014

 

Trend p = 0.132

 

Trend p = 0.097

 

Trend p = 0.878

 

CCI (points)

 0

3 (7.0)

        

 1–2

20 (46.5)

3.11 (0.93–10.47)

0.067

2.45 (0.72–8.38)

0.154

2.55 (0.74–8.76)

0.137

2.49 (0.73–8.53)

0.146

 3–4

14 (32.6)

5.90 (1.70–20.54)

0.005

3.47 (0.94–12.80)

0.062

3.45 (0.94–12.70)

0.063

4.00 (1.06–15.11)

0.041

5

6 (14.0)

8.56 (2.14–34.22)

0.002

5.95 (1.44–24.60)

0.014

5.50 (1.31–23.18)

0.020

5.92 (1.42–24.63)

0.014

  

Trend p < 0.001

 

Trend p = 0.008

 

Trend p = 0.014

 

Trend p = 0.006

 

MNA-SF

 well nourished

2 (4.7)

        

 At Risk

16 (37.2)

1.39 (0.32–6.04)

0.661

1.06 (0.24–4.71)

0.941

    

 malnourished

25 (58.1)

3.70 (0.88–15.61)

0.075

2.17 (0.48–9.84)

0.316

    
  

Trend p = 0.002

 

Trend p = 0.036

     

GNRI

 well nourished and mildly malnourished

14 (32.6)

        

 moderately malnourished

17 (39.5)

5.65 (2.79–11.47)

 < 0.001

    

5.68 (2.74–11.80)

 < 0.001

 severely malnourished

12 (27.9)

9.57 (4.42–20.73)

 < 0.001

    

7.69 (3.13–18.91)

 < 0.001

  

Trend p < 0.001

     

Trend p < 0.001

 

GLIM

 

 well nourished and at-risk for malnutrition

14 (32.6)

        

 moderately malnourished

4 (9.3)

1.52 (0.50–4.60)

0.463

  

1.47 (0.48–4.50)

0.499

  

 severely malnourished

25 (58.1)

3.04 (1.58–5.85)

 < 0.001

  

2.45 (1.22–4.93)

0.012

  
  

Trend p < 0.001

   

Trend p = 0.012

   
  1. Model 1 included age(85), sex(women), prehospital situation, CCI and MNA-SF
  2. Model 2 included age(85), sex(women), prehospital situation, CCI and GNRI
  3. Model 3 included age(85), sex(women),prehospital situation, CCI and GLIM
  4. Data presented as HR (95% CI). HR hazard ratio, CI confidence interval
  5. CCI Charlson comorbidity index, MNA-SF Mini nutritional assessment-Short form, GNRI Geriatric nutritional risk index, GLIM global leadership initiative on malnutrition