Skip Navigation


Age and Ageing Advance Access originally published online on July 25, 2009
Age and Ageing 2009 38(6):663-668; doi:10.1093/ageing/afp128
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
38/6/663    most recent
afp128v1
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Seidel, D.
Right arrow Articles by CFAS, M.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Seidel, D.
Right arrow Articles by CFAS, M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press [on behalf of the British Geriatrics Society]. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Recovery in instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs): findings from the Medical Research Council Cognitive Function and Ageing Study (MRC CFAS)

David Seidel1, Carol Jagger2, Carol Brayne1, Fiona E. Matthews3 and MRC CFAS

1 Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, UK
2 Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, UK
3 Medical Research Council Biostatistics Unit, Cambridge, UK

Address correspondence to: D. Seidel. Tel: (+44) 1223 330 334; Fax: (+44) 1223 330 330. Email: djs216{at}cam.ac.uk

Objective: to provide evidence for predictors of recovery in instrumental activities of daily living (IADLs) among disabled older people living in the community.

Design: MRC CFAS recruited a sample of 13,004 individuals aged 65 years and above from five communities in the UK. Participants underwent a baseline interview between 1990 and 1994 and were re-assessed 2 years later.

Participants: the participants who reported that they were unable to perform any IADL without difficulty or help at baseline (‘disabled’) were included in the analysis.

Methods: logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (OR) for improvement from disabled to non-disabled state at follow-up (‘recovery’).

Results: at baseline, 50% reported disability of whom 9% reported independent function at follow-up. Women (OR = 0.4) and participants aged ≥75 years (OR = 0.2) were least likely to recover, followed by those with poor self-rated health (OR = 0.5), using at least one medication (OR = 0.6) and having more than or equal to two co-morbidities (OR = 0.6).

Conclusion: a minority of participants reporting disability at baseline then reported independent function at 2 years. It may be important to focus on those who seem least likely to recover once they have become disabled. Several factors that have been shown to increase the risk of disability were inversely associated with recovery, suggesting that intervention programmes could target these same factors.

Keywords: recovery, instrumental activities of daily living, MRC CFAS

Received 17 March 2009; accepted in revised form 21 May 2009.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.