Factors associated with the social, individual and programmatic vulnerability of older adults living at home.

OBJECTIVE: To verify the occurrence and factors associated to social, individual and programmatic vulnerability among older adults. METHOD: A household and cross-sectional survey conducted with 701 community-dwelling older adults. For evaluation of the individual component, we used the frailty phenotype; for the social component, the social vulnerability index was implemented; and for the programmatic component, the Index of access and use of health services. Descriptive and bivariate statistical analyzes and multinomial logistic regression were also carried out (p≤ 0.05). RESULTS: It was verified that 15.7% of the older adults lived in areas of high social vulnerability, 31.8% were physically frail and had a moderate programmatic vulnerability score. Older people of a lower age, having lower education and income levels were more likely to live in areas of high or very high social vulnerability. The female gender and the high age groups increased the chances of the frailty condition. It was also observed that the older adults in the 70├ 80-year age group and having lower education were more likely to have medium programmatic vulnerability. CONCLUSION: The importance of primary care professionals to consider the multidimensional aspect of vulnerability in identifying older adults who need to be prioritized in health care is evidenced.

Factors associated with the social, individual and programmatic vulnerability of older adults living at home / Factores asociados con la vulnerabilidad social, individual y programática de personas mayores que viven en domicilio / Fatores associados à vulnerabilidade social, individual e programática de idosos que vivem no domicílio

ABSTRACT Objective: To verify the occurrence and factors associated to social, individual and programmatic vulnerability among older adults. Method: A household and cross-sectional survey conducted with 701 community-dwelling older adults. For evaluation of the individual component, we used the frailty phenotype; for the social component, the social vulnerability index was implemented; and for the programmatic component, the Index of access and use of health services. Descriptive and bivariate statistical analyzes and multinomial logistic regression were also carried out (p≤ 0.05). Results: It was verified that 15.7% of the older adults lived in areas of high social vulnerability, 31.8% were physically frail and had a moderate programmatic vulnerability score. Older people of a lower age, having lower education and income levels were more likely to live in areas of high or very high social vulnerability. The female gender and the high age groups increased the chances of the frailty condition. It was also observed that the older adults in the 70├ 80-year age group and having lower education were more likely to have medium programmatic vulnerability. Conclusion: The importance of primary care professionals to consider the multidimensional aspect of vulnerability in identifying older adults who need to be prioritized in health care is evidenced.

RESUMEN Objetivo: Verificar la ocurrencia y los factores asociados con la vulnerabilidad social, individual y programática entre personas mayores. Método: Encuesta domiciliaria y transversal conducida con 701 personas mayores comunitarias. Para la evaluación del componente individual, se recurrió al fenotipo de la fragilidad; del social al Índice de Vulnerabilidad Social; y del programático al Índice de acceso y utilización del servicio sanitario. Se realizaron análisis estadísticos descriptivo y bivariado y regresión logística multinomial (p≤ 0,05). Resultados: Se constató que el 15,7% de los ancianos residían en áreas de elevada vulnerabilidad social, el 31,8% eran frágiles físicamente y con puntaje moderado de vulnerabilidad programática. Los ancianos con menores rangos de edad, escolaridad e ingresos presentaron mayores probabilidades de residir en áreas de elevada o muy elevada vulnerabilidad social. El sexo femenino y los elevados rangos de edad aumentaron las probabilidades de la condición fragilidad. También se notó que los ancianos de 70├ 80 años y menor escolaridad presentaron mayores probabilidades de tener una vulnerabilidad programática media. Conclusión: Se evidencia la importancia de que los profesionales de la atención primaria consideren el aspecto multidimensional de la vulnerabilidad en la identificación de las personas mayores que necesitan priorizarse en los cuidados sanitarios.

RESUMO Objetivo: Verificar a ocorrência e os fatores associados à vulnerabilidade social, individual e programática entre idosos. Método: Inquérito domiciliar e transversal conduzido com 701 idosos comunitários. Para a avaliação do componente individual, recorreu-se ao fenótipo de fragilidade; do social, ao Índice de Vulnerabilidade Social; e do programático, ao Índice de acesso e utilização do serviço de saúde. Realizaram-se análises estatísticas descritiva e bivariada e regressão logística multinomial (p≤ 0,05). Resultados: Constatou-se que 15,7% dos idosos residiam em áreas de elevada vulnerabilidade social, 31,8% eram frágeis fisicamente e escore moderado de vulnerabilidade programática. Os idosos com menores faixas etárias, escolaridade e renda apresentaram maiores chances de residir em áreas de elevada ou muito elevada vulnerabilidade social. O sexo feminino e as elevadas faixas etárias aumentaram as chances da condição fragilidade. Também se observou que idosos com 70├ 80 anos e menor escolaridade tiveram maiores chances de possuir média vulnerabilidade programática. Conclusão: Evidencia-se a importância de os profissionais da atenção primária considerar o aspecto multidimensional da vulnerabilidade na identificação de idosos que precisam ser priorizados nos cuidados à saúde.

Enfermedades autoreportadas en el adulto mayor: diferencias entre las áreas urbana y rural / Self-reported diseases of the aged adult: differences between the urban and rural areas

Introducción: las poblaciones rurales presentan una realidad que puede contribuir a mayores dificultades en el cuidado de su salud y subdiagnóstico de las enfermedades crónicas. Objetivo: comparar las enfermedades autoreportadas en el adulto mayor por lugar de domicilio. Métodos: estudio transversal, realizado con entrevistas en el domicilio a 2 142 adultos mayores que viven en la zona urbana y 850 en la rural. Se utilizó la estadística descriptiva y regresión logística (p<0,001). Resultados: predominaron el sexo femenino en el área urbana y el masculino en la rural; en ambos grupos las edades comprendidas entre 60-70 años, viudo, 4-8 años de estudio y el ingreso de un salario mínimo. Los adultos mayores del área urbana presentaron mayor proporción de artritis (p<0,001), osteoporosis (p<0,001), mala circulación (p<0,001), problemas cardíacos (p<0,001), de columna (p=0,006); de visión (p<0,001), estreñimiento (p<0,001), catarata (p<0,001); secuela por accidente/trauma (p=0,003) y los tumores benignos (p <0,001). La proporción de la embolia fue mayor entre la zona rural (p<0,001). La mediana del número de enfermedades fue mayor en el área urbana (p<0,001). Conclusiones : en general, la proporción de morbilidad entre los ancianos fue mayor entre los que residen en el zona urbana en comparación con la rural(AU)

Introduction: rural populations have a reality that can contribute to greater difficulties in the health care and poor diagnosis of chronic diseases. Objective: to compare self-reported diseases of the aged adults by dwelling place. Methods: cross-sectional study carried out with home interviews to 2142 aged adults living in urban areas and 850 living in rural areas. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression (p <0.001) was used. Results: there was a predominance of females in urban areas and of males in rural; also in both groups aged between 60-70 years, widowed, 4-8 years of study and income of a minimum wage predominated. Aged adults in urban areas had a higher proportion of arthritis (p<0.001), osteoporosis (p<0.001), poor circulation (p<0.001), heart problems (p<0.001), spine problems (p=0.006); sight problems (p<0.001), constipation (p<0.001), cataract (p<0.001); sequel accident/trauma (p=0.003) and benign tumors (p<0.001). The proportion of stroke was higher among rural aged adults (p<0.001). The average number of diseases was higher in urban areas (p<0.001). Conclusions: general speaking, morbidity proportion between the elderlies was higher among those who dwell in the urban zone in comparison to the rural one(AU)

Quality of life of elderly. Comparison between urban and rural areas.

OBJECTIVE: Comparing the scores of quality of life according to place of residence (urban and rural areas). METHODS: A cross-sectional study involving 2142 elderly in urban area and other 850 in rural area of the municipality of Uberaba (Minas Gerais, Brazil). Instruments used: Olders Americans Resources and Services, World Health Organization Quality of Life--BREF (WHOQOL-BREF) and World Health Organization Quality of Life Assessment for Older Adults (WHOQOL-OLD). RESULTS: We found that in urban area predominated women and men in rural areas. It was common in two areas: 60â±µ70 years old, married marital status, schooling of 4 to 8 years of study and the income of a minimum wage. The elderly residing in the urban area with their children and in rural areas did so with the spouse. In the evaluation of the quality of life, rural elders presented scores significantly higher than the urban area in the domains of physical, psychological, and social relations in the WHOQOL-BREF; and in the facets of autonomy, past, present and future activities, social participation and intimacy of the WHOQOL-OLD. For the latter instrument facets sensory ability and of death and dying the elderly's urban area had higher scores than the rural area. CONCLUSION: The elders of the urban area showed a greater involvement of the quality of life than the residents in the rural area. Nurses who work in primary care should address health strategies according to the specific needs of the urban and rural areas.