Skip to main content
. 2020 Aug;39(8):2593–2599. doi: 10.1016/j.clnu.2019.11.030

Table 2.

Demographics and characteristics of the study cohort. Comparing those with and without hyperosmolar dehydration.

All Patients (n = 6632) Euhydrated (n = 4830) Dehydratedb (n = 1802) P valuea
Age (years) 65–75: n (%) 2692 (40.6) 2103 (43.5) 589 (32.7) <0.001
76–85: n (%) 2555 (38.5) 1801 (37.3) 754 (41.8)
86–95: n (%) 1286 (19.4) 865 (17.9) 421 (23.4)
>95: n (%) 99 (1.5) 61 (1.3) 38 (2.1)
Gender Female: n (%) 3469 (52.3) 2596 (53.7) 873 (48.4) <0.001
Male: n (%) 3163 (47.7) 2234 (46.3) 929 (51.6)
Charlson Comorbidity index None (0): n (%) 1135 (17.1) 910 (18.8) 225 (12.5) <0.001
Mild (1-2): n (%) 3117 (47.0) 2364 (48.9) 753 (41.8)
Moderate (3-4): n (%) 1265 (19.1) 780 (16.1) 485 (26.9)
Severe (≥5): n (%) 1115 (16.8) 776 (16.1) 339 (18.8)
Admission Method Emergency Department: n (%) 2496 (37.6) 1902 (39.4) 594 (33.0) <0.001
General Practitioner: n (%) 3626 (54.7) 2522 (52.2) 1104 (61.3)
Other: n (%) 510 (7.7) 406 (8.4) 104 (5.8)

Osmolarity calculated using the equation of Krahn & Khajuria [1.86 × (sodium + potassium) + (1.15 × glucose) + urea +14].

a

P value comparing patients with and without dehydration.

b

Dehydration indicates hyperosmolar dehydration, serum osmolarity >300 mOsm/l.