Open this publication in new window or tab >>Show others...
2022 (English)In: Asian Journal of Medical Sciences, ISSN 2091-0576, E-ISSN 2091-0576, Vol. 13, no 9, p. 63-71Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]
Background: Interpretation laboratory analyses are crucial when assessing the patient’s condition. Reference intervals from apparently healthy and disease-free individuals may cause problems when outcomes from elderly patients with chronic diseases and on medications are being interpreted. Elderly individuals are a heterogeneous group ranging from individuals managing their daily life independently to individuals with diseases and impairment, in need of nursing care around the clock, that is, frail; a term widely used although there is no consensus on the definition.
Aims and Objectives: The aim of the study was to study the effect of classification of elderly into healthy, moderately healthy, and frail, based on activities of daily living (ADL) and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) or frailty index (FI), on the interpretation of outcomes regarding: Albumin, alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), creatinine, and gamma-glutamyltransferase (γ-GT) levels.
Materials and Methods: Individuals ≥80 years (n=568) were classified either on ADL and MMSE or number of deficits, (FI).
Results: Individuals classified as frail based on FI had lower mean levels for ALT, creatinine and γ-GT than individuals classified based on ADL and MMSE (P<0.05).
Conclusion: The model to define health status to some extent affected laboratory analyte levels in ≥80 years old, classified as healthy, moderately healthy, and frail based on ADL and MMSE versus FI.
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Nepal Journals Online (NepJOL), 2022
Keywords
Aging; Frail elderly; Analyte; Reference interval; Clinical interpretation
National Category
Geriatrics Clinical Laboratory Medicine
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-192092 (URN)10.3126/ajms.v13i9.45298 (DOI)
2023-03-012023-03-012023-03-02