Search

The association between underweight and pressure injuries (PIs) has been established in several studies. However, there is a lack of well-designed research investigating the connection between overweight and obesity with these injuries. This meta-analysis aims to investigate the dose-response relationship between body mass index (BMI) and the risk of PIs in adult hospitalized patients. PubMed, Web of Science, and MEDLINE Databases were searched from inception to May 2024. Observational articles with at least three BMI categories were included in the study. BMI was defined as underweight, normal weight, overweight, and morbid obesity for the meta-analysis. The non-linear relationship between BMI and the risk of PIs in hospitalized adults was investigated using restricted cubic spline models. Fractional polynomial modeling was used. Eleven articles reporting at least 3 categories of BMI met the inclusion criteria, including 31,389 participants. Compared to patients with normal weight, those with underweight, obesity, and morbid obesity exhibited an increased risk of PIs, with odds ratios of 1.70 (95%CI:1.50–1.91), 1.12 (95%CI:1.02–1.24), 1.70 (95%CI:1.13–2.55), respectively. A J-shaped dose-response model was established for the relationship between PI risk and BMI (P non-linearity < 0.001, P linearity = 0.745). The J-shaped dose-response pattern revealed that underweight, obesity and morbid obesity heightened the risk of PIs in hospitalized adults. Lower and higher BMI values may signify an increased risk for PIs, particularly among the elderly with lower BMI, providing valuable guidance for medical staff. • A J-shaped dose-response model was established for the relationship between PI risk and BMI (P non-linearity < 0.001). • Underweight, obese, and morbidly obese patients have higher PI risk than normal weight ones. • Lower and higher BMI values may signify an increased risk for PIs, particularly among the elderly with lower BMI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To evaluate the associations between frailty and all-cause and cancer-related mortality. Additionally, the objective is to compare the magnitude of these associations between older adults and younger adults. We gathered baseline data from NHANES (1999–2018) and developed a cumulative index consisting of 39 items to evaluate frailty. The National Death Index database was utilized to track the survival status of individuals. The Cox regression model was employed to estimate the associations between frailty status and all-cause and cancer-related mortality. Ultimately , 3398 cancer patients were included in the analysis, comprising 910 younger adults and 2488 older adults. Compared to non-frail patients, the elevated all-cause and cancer-related mortality among pre-frail patients was not statistically significant (HRs = 1.312, 95%CI: 0.956–1.800, P = 0.092; HRs = 1.462, 0.811–2.635, P = 0.207). However, a significant elevation of both all-cause and cancer-related mortality risk was observed among frail patients (HRs = 2.213, 1.617–3.030, P < 0.001; HRs = 2.463, 95%CI = 1.370–4.429, P = 0.003). Frailty individuals demonstrated a more pronounced association with the prediction of all-cause mortality in younger (HRs = 2.230, 1.073–4.634, P = 0.032) than in older adults (HRs = 2.090, 1.475–2.960, P < 0.001). Sensitivity analysis consistently revealed robust results. RCS plots suggested a progressively escalating dose-response correlation between frailty and both all-cause and cancer-related mortality risk. Pre-frailty did not result in an increase in mortality risks compared to non-frailty. However, frailty caused a higher all-cause and cancer-related mortality risk than non-frailty. Identifying those at risk and implementing targeted interventions may contribute to extending healthy life expectancy, regardless of age. • We collected NHANES baseline data, creating a 39-item frailty index linked to NDI, to assess frailty. • RCS plots indicated a growing frailty correlation with all-cause and cancer mortality risks. • Pre-frailty didn't raise mortality risks over non-frailty, but frailty did, especially for cancer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]