Midlife contributors to socioeconomic differences in frailty during later life: a prospective cohort study

Abstract

SummaryBackgroundHealth inequalities persist into old age. We aimed to investigate risk factors for socioeconomic differences in frailty that could potentially be modified through policy measures.MethodsIn this multi-wave longitudinal cohort study (Whitehall II study), we assessed participants' socioeconomic status, behavioural and biomedical risk factors, and disease status at age 45–55 years, and frailty (defined according to the Fried phenotype) at baseline and at one or more of three clinic visits about 18 years later (mean age 69 years [SD 5·9]). We used logistic mixed models to examine the associations between socioeconomic status and risk factors at age 50 years and subsequent prevalence of frailty (adjusted for sex, ethnic origin, and age), with sensitivity analyses and multiple imputation for missing data.FindingsBetween Sept 9, 2007, and Dec 8, 2016, 6233 middle-aged adults were measured for frailty. Frailty was present in 562 (3%) of 16 164 person-observations, and varied by socioeconomic status: 145 (2%) person-observations had high socioeconomic status, 241 (4%) had intermediate status, and 176 (7%) had low socioeconomic status, adjusting for sex and age. Risk factors for frailty included cardiovascular disease, depression, smoking, high or abstinent alcohol consumption, low fruit and vegetable consumption, physical inactivity, poor lung function, hypertension, and overweight or obesity. Cardiometabolic markers for future frailty were high ratio of total to high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and raised interleukin-6 and C-reactive protein concentrations. The five most important factors contributing to the frailty gradient, assessed by percent attenuation of the association between socioeconomic status and frailty, were physical activity (13%), interleukin-6 (13%), body-mass index category (11%), C-reactive protein (11%), and poor lung function (10%). Overall, socioeconomic differences in frailty were reduced by 40% in the maximally-adjusted model compared with the minimally-adjusted model.InterpretationBehavioural and cardiometabolic risk factors in midlife account for more than a third of socioeconomic differences in frailty. Our findings suggest that interventions targeting physical activity, obesity, smoking, and low-grade inflammation in middle age might reduce socioeconomic differences in later-life frailty.FundingBritish Heart Foundation and British Medical Research Council.

Midlife vulnerability and food insecurity: Findings from low-income adults in the US National Health Interview Survey

“…Additional research is needed to further specify and test the mechanisms underlying food insecurity [44] and provide an empirical base for the hypothesized relationships in Fig 1 [6,7,13,35,36,43,44]. Such research would inform a growing literature on the cumulative effects of hardships across the life course [62,65,66] and their role in accelerating aging [8,64,[67][68][69][70][71]. Further exploration of midlife vulnerability is needed to identify prevention and screening (e.g., primary care) strategies designed to halt or slow disease progression, promote rehabilitation, and increase wellness into later life [72,73].…”

The educational gradient of living alone: A comparison among the working-age population in Europe

“…Previous research has found that socioeconomic circumstances (educational level, income, employment status, etc. ), especially in late midlife, are strongly associated with living arrangements, social support, and health later in life (Brunner et al 2018). Educational level represents the most important proxy for the income capability and sociocultural resources of different individuals and, as such, is important to their chances of partnering and family formation (Bellani, Esping-Andersen, and Nedoluzhko 2017;Demey et al 2013).…”

Older persons are frailer after an emergency care visit to the out-of-hours General Practitioner Cooperative in the Netherlands: a cross-sectional descriptive TOPICS-MDS study

“…Demographic variables that signi cantly differed between the group of older persons with GPC contact and the group of persons with no GPC contact were used as adjustment factors (confounders) in the multilevel analysis for outcome measures. Furthermore, we adjusted for SES in our frailty analyses, because frailty is associated with socioeconomic inequalities (27,28). Finally, we adjusted for hospital admission in the analysis of frailty in older persons, as this appeared to be a signi cant relevant factor.…”