Table 1. Participants’ Characteristics at the Start of the Study and Length of Hospitalization by Group.
| Variable | Participantsa | |
|---|---|---|
| Intervention (n = 130) | Control (n = 130) | |
| Age, mean (SD), y | 87.4 (4.9) | 87.5 (5.0) |
| Sex | ||
| Female | 58 (44.6) | 76 (58.5) |
| Male | 72 (55.4) | 54 (41.5) |
| BMI, mean (SD) b | 27 (4.3) | 26.0 (4.5) |
| Living at homec | 123 (95.3) | 123 (95.3) |
| Comorbidities | ||
| High comorbidityd | 75 (58.6) | 71 (55.5) |
| Heart failureb | 68 (53.1) | 64 (50.0) |
| Diabetesb | 47 (36.7) | 44 (34.4) |
| Moderate-severe CKDb | 39 (30.5) | 36 (28.1) |
| COPDb | 43 (33.6) | 31 (24.2) |
| Strokeb | 24 (18.8) | 24 (18.8) |
| Myocardial infarctionb | 25 (19.5) | 22 (17.2) |
| Cancerb | 26 (20.3) | 14 (10.9) |
| Dementiab | 17 (13.3) | 20 (15.6) |
| Geriatric syndromes | ||
| Frailty phenotypee | 72 (56.7) | 80 (64.0) |
| Depressionf | 33 (26.4) | 44 (34.1) |
| Fallsg | 35 (27.6) | 41 (31.8) |
| Pressure ulcersb | 3 (2.3) | 3 (2.3) |
| Polypharmacy (≥7 drugs)g | 99 (78.0) | 94 (72.9) |
| MNA-SF screening score, mean (SD)h | 11.1 (2.4) | 10.3 (2.4) |
| Malnutrition risk | 44 (37.0) | 56 (49.1) |
| Confirmed malnutrition | 10 (8.4) | 18 (15.8) |
| Main admission diagnosisi | ||
| Circulatory | 29 (23.0) | 36 (28.8) |
| Infection | 26 (20.6) | 24 (19.2) |
| Digestive | 20 (15.9) | 16 (12.8) |
| Respiratory | 16 (12.7) | 8 (6.4) |
| Blood or myeloproliferative disease | 12 (9.5) | 12 (9.6) |
| Functional capacity | ||
| At baseline (2 wk before admission) | ||
| Katz Index score, mean (SD)j | 4.5 (1.7) | 4.4 (1.7) |
| Independent ambulationk | 95 (74.2) | 88 (67.7) |
| At admission | ||
| Katz Index, mean (SD)l | 3.1 (2.0) | 2.8 (1.9) |
| Independent ambulationm | 57 (45.6) | 50 (40.0) |
| Length of stay, median (IQR), d | 7.0 (5.0) | 6.0 (4.0) |
Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared); CKD, chronic kidney disease; COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; MNA-SF, Mini Nutritional Assessment Short Form.
Data are presented as number (percentage) of patients unless otherwise indicated.
Data missing for 4 patients (2 in each group).
Data missing for 2 patients (1 in each group).
Defined as having a Charlson Comorbidity Index score of 3 or higher.32
Defined as having 3 or more of 5 Fried criteria.33
Data missing for 6 patients (2 in the control group and 4 in the intervention group).
Data missing for 4 patients (1 in the control group and 3 in the intervention group).
Ranging from 0 (worse) to 14 (best)34; data missing for 27 patients (16 in the control group and 11 in the intervention group).
Data missing for 9 patients (5 in the control group and 4 in the intervention group).
Higher scores indicate better function; data missing for 2 patients in the intervention group.
Independent ambulation considered if the Functional Ambulatory Classification score was 4 or higher23; data missing for 2 patients in the intervention group.
Data missing for 10 patients (3 in the control group and 7 in the intervention group).
Data missing for 10 patients (5 in each group).