4.7 Article

The Association Between Stroke, Depression, and 5-Year Mortality Among Very Old People

期刊

STROKE
卷 44, 期 9, 页码 2587-2589

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.113.002202

关键词

cerebrovascular disorders; depression; epidemiology; mortality; stroke; very old

资金

  1. Fund for Stroke Research in Norrland
  2. Bothnia Atlantica Program
  3. European Regional Development Fund
  4. Swedish Research Council
  5. Umea University Foundations for Medical Research
  6. Swedish Dementia Association

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and Purpose Depression after stroke has been associated with increased mortality, but little is known about this association among very old people. Methods A population-based study among people 85 years of age was conducted in northern Sweden and Finland, comprising cross-sectional assessments and subsequent survival data. The 452 individuals who had completed the Geriatric Depression Scale-15 assessment were selected. Depression was defined as a score of 5 on the geriatric depression scale. Results Of those with a history of stroke, 38 of 88 (43.2%) people were depressed, and 11 of the 38 (28.9%) were treated with antidepressants, compared with 91 of 364 (25.0%) depressed (P=0.001) and 17 of 91 (18.7%) treated with antidepressants among those without stroke. Having a history of stroke and ongoing depression was associated with increased 5-year mortality compared with having only stroke (hazard ratio, 1.90; confidence interval, 1.15-3.13), having only depression (hazard ratio, 1.59; confidence interval, 1.03-2.45), and compared with having neither stroke nor depression (hazard ratio, 2.50; confidence interval, 1.69-3.69). Having only stroke without depression did not increase mortality compared with having neither stroke nor depression. Conclusions A history of stroke was associated with increased mortality among very old people but only among those who were also depressed. Depression seemed to be underdiagnosed and undertreated.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据