Table 2.
Multinomial Logistic Regression Predicting the Odds of POMA Class Membership
| Class 1 vs Class 3, remained non-disabled vs remained disabled | Class 2 vs Class 3, became disabled vs remained disabled | Class 1 vs Class 2, remained non-disabled vs became disabled | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 1 | Model 2 | |
| Age | .90*** (.88, .92) | 1.01 (.92, 1.1) | .92*** (.90, .94) | 0.97 (.90, 1.1) | .97** (.96, .99) | 1.03 (.99, 1.1) |
| Female | .65** (.50, .86) | 6.92** (2.1, 22.2) | 1.02 (.77, 1.3) | 4.00* (1.4, 11.7) | .64*** (.53, .78) | 1.73* (1.1, 2.7) |
| Education (≥ HS) | 1.54 (.99, 2.4) | 1.02 (.18, 5.7) | .54* (.33, .88) | .21 (.04, 1.0) | 2.87*** (2.0, 4.0) | 4.76*** (2.3, 9.9) |
| Financial strain | .43*** (.34, .56) | .24** (.09, .65) | .96 (.76, 1.2) | .63 (.25, 1.6) | .45*** (.38, .54) | .38*** (.26, .56) |
| Unmarried | .97 (.69, 1.4) | 1.18 (.33, 4.3) | .98 (.69, 1.4) | .73 (.22, 2.4) | .99 (.78, 1.27) | 1.61 (.97, 2.7) |
| Lives alone | .95 (.66, 1.3) | 1.54 (.37, 6.3) | .95 (.66, 1.3) | 1.76 (.48, 6.4) | 1.00 (.76, 1.31) | .88 (.49, 1.6) |
| No contact w/family and friends | .89 (.63, 1.3) | .79 (.18, 3.4) | .70 (.48, 1.0) | .67 (.18, 2.6) | 1.28 (.97, 1.70) | 1.18 (.67, 2.1) |
| Social support | .98 (.79, 1.2) | .52 (.22, 1.2) | .98 (.79, 1.2) | .48 (.22, 1.0) | 1.00 (.86, 1.17) | 1.07 (.78, 1.5) |
| Immigrant (1–19) | .88 (.60, 1.3) | .44 (.09, 2.2) | 1.05 (.72, 1.5) | .82 (.19, 3.6) | .84 (.62, 1.13) | .54* (.29, .98) |
| Immigrant (20–49) | 1.76** (1.3, 2.4) | 3.05 (.71, 13.2) | 1.03 (.73, 1.4) | 1.53 (.39, 6.1) | 1.70*** (1.4, 2.1) | 1.99* (1.2, 3.3) |
| Immigrant (50+) | 2.67*** (1.6, 4.4) | 77.26*** (12.4, 481) | 1.01 (.59, 1.7) | 7.26* (1.4, 38.6) | 2.64*** (1.8, 3.7) | 10.64*** (5.1, 22.3) |
| CES-D | .94 (.88, 1.0) | .96 (.91, 1.0) | .98 (.96, 1.0) | |||
| Class 1 vs Class 3, remained non-disabled vs remain disabled | Class 2 vs Class 3, became disabled vs remain disabled | Class 1 vs Class 2, remained non-disabled vs became disabled | ||||
| Model 2 | Model 2 | Model 2 | ||||
| MMSE | 1.00 (.87, 1.1) | .96 (.84, 1.1) | 1.04 (.99, 1.1) | |||
| Smoker | .34 (.07, 1.7) | .43 (.09, 2.0) | .78 (.45, 1.4) | |||
| Drinker | 2.61 (.48, 14.1) | 2.18 (.45, 10.1) | 1.19 (.68, 2.1) | |||
| Obese | .07*** (.02, .20) | .36* (.14, .97) | .19*** (.12, .29) | |||
| Diabetic | 2.01 (.62, 6.5) | 1.18 (.40, 3.5) | 1.70* (1.1, 2.6) | |||
| Hypertensive | .98 (.35, 2.8) | .71 (.27, 1.9) | 1.38 (.92, 2.1) | |||
| History of heart attack | 6.24 (.84, 46.2) | 3.16 (.47, 21.2) | 1.97* (1.05, 3.7) | |||
| History of stroke | 1.35 (.21, 8.5) | 0.91 (.18, 4.5) | 1.48 (.61, 3.6) | |||
| POMA | 159.8*** (90.3, 282) | 11.78*** (7.16, 19.4) | 13.65*** (10.3, 18) | |||
Notes. CES-D = center for epidemiologic studies depression scale ; H-EPESE = Hispanic established populations for the epidemiologic study of the elderly, n = 2,455; HS = high school; MMSE = mini-mental state exam; POMA = performance oriented mobility assessment. The model fit statistics for the three-class solution were as follows: BIC = 50119.55 and LMR-LRT = 88.137 (p < .05).
Shown are odds ratios and 96% confidence intervals (CIs). *p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001.