Search

Objective: To study fragile elderly people in the population, their characteristics and their distribution according to fragility markers., Design: Cross-sectional, descriptive study using a survey., Setting: Primary care. Elderly people living in Guadalajara in January 2002., Participants: 434 people were interviewed (1.24% of population). There were 157 losses (26.6%)., Interventions: The questionnaire contained social and demographic variables (age, sex, setting), care variables (medication, pathologies, home care) and evaluative scales (Barthel, Folstein, Yesavage, Diaz-Palacios)., Main Measurements: Fragility markers: 3 or more pathologies, 6 or more drugs, dementia, and/or positive on one of the four scales used., Results: Subjects lived in rural areas more (56.7%; CI, 52-61.3), but there were not more women. Fragile elderly, n=257 (59.2%; CI, 54.6-63.8), were more women (OR=1.8; CI, 1.5-2.2) and over 70 (OR=80-84, 5.2; CI, 3.7-7.5; OR=85-89, 8.2; CI, 5.3-12.8). Prevalence of markers was: 3 or more pathologies, 30.2% (95% CI, 25.8-34.5); cognitive deterioration, 22.6% (95% CI, 18.7-26.5); social risk, 20.8% (95% CI, 16.3-23.8); multi-medication, 18.7% (95% CI, 15-22.3); Barthel incapacity, 11.7 (95% CI, 8.7-14.8); depression, 5.3% (95% CI, 3.2-7.5); and dementia, 3.2% (95% CI, 1.6-4.9). Women suffered cognitive deterioration more. The over-80s suffered cognitive deterioration, social risk and incapacity more., Conclusions: There was high prevalence of fragility with cognitive deterioration, multi-medication and social risk; and lower presence of dementia. Women and the most elderly people were most affected.