TY - JOUR
T1 - Recovery from Severe Disability that Develops Progressively Versus Catastrophically
T2 - Incidence, Risk Factors, and Intervening Events
AU - Gill, Thomas M.
AU - Gahbauer, Evelyne A.
AU - Leo-Summers, Linda
AU - Murphy, Terrence E.
N1 - Funding Information:
The work for this report was funded by National Institute on Aging Grant R01AG17560. The study was conducted at the Yale Claude D. Pepper Older Americans Independence Center (P30AG021342). Dr Gill is the recipient of an Academic Leadership Award (K07AG043587) from the National Institute on Aging.
Funding Information:
We thank Denise Shepard, BSN, MBA, Andrea Benjamin, BSN, Barbara Foster, and Amy Shelton, MPH, for assistance with data collection; Geraldine Hawthorne, BS, for assistance with data entry and management; Peter Charpentier, MPH, for design and development of the study database and participant tracking system; and Joanne McGloin, MDiv, MBA, for leadership and advice as the Project Director. The work for this report was funded by National Institute on Aging Grant R01AG17560. The study was conducted at the Yale Claude D. Pepper Older Americans Independence Center (P30AG021342). Dr Gill is the recipient of an Academic Leadership Award (K07AG043587) from the National Institute on Aging. The authors have no conflicts of interest. Dr Gill had full access to all the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. All authors meet the criteria for authorship stated in the Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals. Study concept and design: Gill. Acquisition of data: Gill, Gahbauer, and Leo-Summers. Analysis and interpretation of data: Gill, Gahbauer, Leo-Summers, and Murphy. Preparation of manuscript: Gill. Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Gill, Gahbauer, Leo-Summers, and Murphy. Statistical analysis: Murphy. The organizations funding this study had no role in the design or conduct of the study; in the collection, management, analysis, or interpretation of the data; or in the preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 The American Geriatrics Society
PY - 2020/9/1
Y1 - 2020/9/1
N2 - BACKGROUND: Few prior studies have evaluated recovery after the onset of severe disability or have distinguished between the two subtypes of severe disability. OBJECTIVES: To identify the risk factors and intervening illnesses and injuries (i.e., events) that are associated with reduced recovery after episodes of progressive and catastrophic severe disability. DESIGN: Prospective longitudinal study of 754 nondisabled community-living persons, aged 70 years or older. SETTING: Greater New Haven, CT, March 1998 to December 2016. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 431 episodes of severe disability were evaluated from 385 participants: 116 progressive (115 participants) and 315 catastrophic (270 participants). MEASUREMENTS: Candidate risk factors were assessed every 18 months. Functional status and exposure to intervening events leading to hospitalization, emergency department visit, or restricted activity were assessed each month. Severe disability was defined as the need for personal assistance with three or more of four essential activities of daily living. Recovery was defined as return to independent function (no disability) within 6 months of developing severe disability. RESULTS: Recovery occurred among 35.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 26.0%–48.0%) and 61.6% (95% CI = 53.5%–70.9%) of the 116 progressive and 315 catastrophic severe disability episodes, respectively. In the multivariable analyses, lives alone, frailty, and intervening hospitalization were each independently associated with reduced recovery from progressive disability, with adjusted hazard ratios (95% CIs) of 0.31 (0.15–0.64), 0.23 (0.12–0.45), and 0.27 (0.08–0.95), respectively, whereas low functional self-efficacy, intervening restricted activity, and intervening hospitalization were each independently associated with reduced recovery from catastrophic disability, with adjusted hazard ratios (95% CIs) of 0.56 (0.40–0.81), 0.55 (0.35–0.85), and 0.45 (0.31–0.66), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Recovery of independent function is considerably more likely after the onset of catastrophic than progressive severe disability, the risk factors for reduced recovery differ between progressive and catastrophic severe disability, and subsequent exposure to intervening illnesses and injuries considerably diminishes the likelihood of recovery from both subtypes of severe disability.
AB - BACKGROUND: Few prior studies have evaluated recovery after the onset of severe disability or have distinguished between the two subtypes of severe disability. OBJECTIVES: To identify the risk factors and intervening illnesses and injuries (i.e., events) that are associated with reduced recovery after episodes of progressive and catastrophic severe disability. DESIGN: Prospective longitudinal study of 754 nondisabled community-living persons, aged 70 years or older. SETTING: Greater New Haven, CT, March 1998 to December 2016. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 431 episodes of severe disability were evaluated from 385 participants: 116 progressive (115 participants) and 315 catastrophic (270 participants). MEASUREMENTS: Candidate risk factors were assessed every 18 months. Functional status and exposure to intervening events leading to hospitalization, emergency department visit, or restricted activity were assessed each month. Severe disability was defined as the need for personal assistance with three or more of four essential activities of daily living. Recovery was defined as return to independent function (no disability) within 6 months of developing severe disability. RESULTS: Recovery occurred among 35.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 26.0%–48.0%) and 61.6% (95% CI = 53.5%–70.9%) of the 116 progressive and 315 catastrophic severe disability episodes, respectively. In the multivariable analyses, lives alone, frailty, and intervening hospitalization were each independently associated with reduced recovery from progressive disability, with adjusted hazard ratios (95% CIs) of 0.31 (0.15–0.64), 0.23 (0.12–0.45), and 0.27 (0.08–0.95), respectively, whereas low functional self-efficacy, intervening restricted activity, and intervening hospitalization were each independently associated with reduced recovery from catastrophic disability, with adjusted hazard ratios (95% CIs) of 0.56 (0.40–0.81), 0.55 (0.35–0.85), and 0.45 (0.31–0.66), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Recovery of independent function is considerably more likely after the onset of catastrophic than progressive severe disability, the risk factors for reduced recovery differ between progressive and catastrophic severe disability, and subsequent exposure to intervening illnesses and injuries considerably diminishes the likelihood of recovery from both subtypes of severe disability.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85085897415&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85085897415&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1111/jgs.16567
DO - 10.1111/jgs.16567
M3 - Article
C2 - 32495396
AN - SCOPUS:85085897415
SN - 0002-8614
VL - 68
SP - 2067
EP - 2073
JO - Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
JF - Journal of the American Geriatrics Society
IS - 9
ER -