Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2009 Jan 6.
Published in final edited form as: J Am Geriatr Soc. 2008 May 19;56(7):1183–1190. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2008.01757.x

Table 2.

Treatment Utilities of Vulnerable and Non-Vulnerable Older Patients, Means (± SD)*

Treatment states Vulnerable Non-vulnerable P-Value
 Aspirin 0.79 (0.28) 0.83 (0.28) 0.02
 Cholesterol lowering pill 0.72 (0.30) 0.83 (0.26) < 0.01
 Intensive glucose control 0.61 (0.34) 0.72(0.32) < 0.01
 Conventional glucose control 0.71 (0.33) 0.79 (0.28) < 0.01
 Intensive blood pressure control 0.69 (0.33) 0.76 (0.29) 0.04
 Conventional blood pressure control 0.73 (0.32) 0.80 (0.28) 0.03
 Diet 0.89 (0.23) 0.90 (0.21) 0.55
 Exercise 0.85 (0.26) 0.91 (0.19) < 0.01
 Polypharmacy state 0.58 (0.35) 0.66 (0.32) 0.02
 Polypill 0.60 (0.34) 0.70 (0.32) 0.02
Difference in conventional and intensive control states
 Glucose control 0.09 (0.25) 0.07 (0.20) 0.67
 Blood pressure control 0.04 (0.15) 0.03 (0.19) 0.37
 Cholesterol control (diet and exercise versus cholesterol lowering pill) 0.25 (0.34) 0.19 (0.29) 0.06
*

Utilities (preference ratings on a scale from 0 to 1) measured using time-tradeoff technique.

Patients classified as vulnerable if they scored 3 or more points on the Vulnerable Elders Scale.19

P-values reflect results from Wilcoxon Rank-Sum tests.