中国全科医学 ›› 2021, Vol. 24 ›› Issue (36): 4599-4606.DOI: 10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2021.02.037

所属专题: 衰弱最新文章合集 老年问题最新文章合集

• 专题研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

慢性疾病稳定期老年患者25-羟维生素D及白介素6与衰弱的相关性研究

戴靖榕1,2,李婕1,2,何旭1,2,李杨1,2,李燕1,2*   

  1. 1.650500云南省昆明市,昆明理工大学医学院 2.650032云南省昆明市,云南省第一人民医院老年医学科
    *通信作者:李燕,教授,博士生导师,主任医师;E-mail:liyanken@126.com
  • 出版日期:2021-12-20 发布日期:2022-03-01
  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金资助项目(81760109);国家重点研发计划(2018YFC2002103);云南省卫生科技计划项目(2017NS221,2017NS222);云南省临床医学开发项目(2019LCZXKF-NM08)

Relationship of 25-Hydroxyvitamin D and Interleukin-6 with Frailty in Hospitalized Elderly Patients with Chronic Disease in the Stable Phase 

DAI Jingrong1,2,LI Jie1,2,HE Xu1,2,LI Yang1,2,LI Yan1,2*   

  1. 1.School of Medicine,Kunming University of Science and Technology,Kunming 650500,China
    2.Department of Geriatrics,the First People's Hospital of Yunnan Province,Kunming 650032,China
    *Corresponding author: LI Yan,Professor,Doctoral supervisor,Chief physician;E-mail: liyanken@126.com
  • Published:2021-12-20 Online:2022-03-01

摘要: 背景 随着我国人口老龄化加剧,老年衰弱问题日益严峻,而当前存在关于衰弱的诊断依据不客观、发病机制不清楚、干预方式不健全等问题,因此,当前对衰弱的研究仍处在初级阶段。目的 研究慢性疾病稳定期老年患者25-羟维生素D、白介素6与衰弱的相关性,探寻衰弱的客观诊断依据及新的干预方式。方法 选取2020年11月至2021年4月在云南省第一人民医院老年医学科住院的慢性疾病稳定期老年患者152例为研究对象。收集患者一般资料及实验室检查指标,并采用云南省第一人民医院老年医学科自主研发的“老年综合评估系统软件平台(住院版)”对患者进行老年综合评估,利用其中Fried表型对患者进行衰弱状态评估。结果 152例患者中,无衰弱47例(30.9%)、衰弱前期51例(33.6%)、衰弱期54例(35.6%)。二元Logistic回归分析结果显示,失能〔OR=6.162,95%CI(1.091,34.789),P=0.039〕、25-羟维生素D〔OR=0.901,95%CI(0.825,0.985),P=0.022〕、白介素6〔OR=1.103,95%CI(1.012,1.201),P=0.025〕是慢性疾病稳定期老年患者衰弱的影响因素。结论 25-羟维生素D是慢性疾病稳定期老年患者衰弱的保护因素,白介素6是慢性疾病稳定期老年患者衰弱的危险因素;25-羟维生素D、白介素6有望成为预测及干预慢性疾病稳定期老年患者衰弱的潜在靶点。

关键词: 衰弱, 老年人, 慢性病, 25-羟维生素D, 维生素D, 白介素-6

Abstract:

AbstractBackground  Frailty-related issue is increasingly prominent with the acceleration of aging in China.However, domestic research on frailty is still in its infancy characterized by non-objective diagnosis basis, unclear pathogenesis and imperfect interventions.Objective  To investigate the correlation of 25-hydroxyvitamin D and interleukin-6 with frailty in elderly patients with chronic disease in the stable phase,so asto explore objective diagnostic basis and new interventions for frailty. Methods  A total of 152 inpatients (≥ 60 years old) with chronic disease in the stable phase were recruited from Department of Geriatrics,the First People's Hospital of Yunnan Province(hereinafter referred to as “the department of the hospital”) from November 2020 to April 2021. Clinic and laboratory data were collected. Comprehensive geriatric assessment was conducted via an internet-based platform of the Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment(inpatient version) developed by the department of the hospital,among which frailty was assessed by the Chinese version of Fried Frailty Phenotype,a component of the assessment scale. Results  Among the 152 patients,47(30.9%) had no frailty,51(33.6%) had pre-frailty and 54(35.6%) had frailty. According to the binary Logistic regression analysis,disability〔OR=6.162,95%CI(1.091,34.789),P=0.039〕, 25-hydroxyvitamin D〔OR=0.901,95%CI(0.825,0.985),P=0.022〕 and interleukin-6〔OR=1.103,95%CI(1.012,1.201),P=0.025〕 were influencing factors for frailty in elderly patients with chronic disease in the stable phase. Conclusion  Sufficient 25-hydroxyvitamin D may be associated with decreased risk of frailty and elevated interleukin-6 may be associated with increased risk of frailty in elderly patients with chronic disease in the stable phase. So these two indicators may be potential targets for predicting and treating frailty.

【Key words】 Frailty;Aged;Chronic disease;25-hydroxy-vitamin D;Vitamin D;Interleukin-6

【Chinese Library Classification Number】R 151.1 【Document Identification Code】A

1.Introduction

Frailty is a special state in which the physical functions of the elderly gradually decline. It is characterized by weakened muscle strength and endurance, decreased physiological functions, increased vulnerability, decreased anti-stress ability with subsequent adverse consequences such as falls, disability, cognitive impairment, mental abnormalities, and even death[1][2]. To identify high-risk older adults, Fried et al.[3]roposed the use of a clinical phenotype to characterize frailty, which consisted of five body components, including decreased muscle strength, reduced walking speed, fatigue, reduced physical activity and unconscious weight loss. These criteria are now widely used in clinical research for the diagnosis of frailty.

With the aging of the Chinese population, the problem of frailty in old age is increasingly serious. However, frailty specific diagnosis is not objective, the pathogenesis is not clear, and the intervention is not sound, indicating that the current research on this matter is yet in its infancy. Although there are previous studies that have explored the possibility of symptoms related to the geriatric syndrome, such as cognitive function, daily activity ability, anxiety and depression and others, to diagnose frailty more confidently and precisely, data on the correlation between 25- hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D), interleukin (IL)-6 and frailty in elderly are still missing. Therefore, we aim to explore the correlation between senile frailty and 25(OH)D and IL-6, so asto lay a foundation for the objective diagnosis and intervention of senile frailty in the future.


2   Objects and Methods

2.1 Research objects   

152 patients at the age of 60 years and above, diagnosed with a chronic disease in the stable phase were recruited at the Department of Geriatrics, the First People's Hospital of Yunnan Province, China. The inclusion criteria were as follows: 1) previously hospitalized patients with no new disease, aged ≥ 60 years without new disease, 2) patients with no communication barriers and able to cooperate in the comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA), and 3) patients who were voluntarily participating in the study and have signed the informed consent. The applied exclusion criteria were: 1) elderly people who have been supplemented with Vitamin D and anti-inflammatory drugs in the past one month, 2) patients, who were diagnosed with acute infectious diseases recently, 3) patients with serious physical and/or mental diseases with communication barriers, who were unable to complete the Fried scale assessment, 4) patients who were bedridden or unstable for a long time and 5) patientswho had insufficient information on the evaluation scale or laboratory data.

This study was implemented after approval of the Medical Ethics Committee of the First People's Hospital of Yunnan Province (No. KHLL2021-KY034).

2.2   Data Collection

2.2.1 General information   

Patients’ general information, including age, gender, height, body mass, body mass index (BMI), educational level, allergyhistory, vision or hearing loss, presence or absence of dentures, marital status, eating habits, sleep time, sleep aids supplementation, current smoking (referring to smoking in the last 30 days before the survey), current drinking (referring to the alcohol consumption in the last 30 days before the survey) were collected.

2.2.2    Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (CGA) 

The internet-based platform of the Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment (inpatient version) is a software independently developed by the Department of Geriatrics, First People's Hospital of Yunnan Province, China and was applied in the current study. It consists of several national general assessment scales and has certain intelligence. The calculated scores and evaluation results were given automatically according to each assessment option following the criteria and reference scope formulated by various general scales. The researchers collected patients’ data through a WeChat mini-program or computer, and Excel forms were automatically generated for data summary later. The assessors were geriatricians who have received the "Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment System" software training. The assessment included mainly nutritional status assessment and the Micronutrient Assessment Scale (MNA-SF) was used. Values ≥ 24 were considered as indicators of good nutrition, betwen17 and 24 were designated as potential malnutrition, while between 0 and 17 were classified as malnutrition. The cognitive function assessment was according to the Simple Mental State Examination Scale (MMSE), where values between 0 and 9 were classified as a severe impairment, between 10 and 20 - as moderate impairment, between 21 and 26 were classified as mild impairment, while scores between 27 and 30 were designated as cognitive normal functions. Evaluation of anxiety and depression followed the Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS-15), where scores ≥ 6 indicated anxiety and depression. Evaluation of depression following the Self-rating Depression Scale (SDS) was used and the T scores <50 indicated no presence of depression, whereas T ≥ 50 was classified as a depressive mental state. The evaluation of anxiety was according to the Self-rating Anxiety Scale (SAS), where scores <50 indicated lack of anxiety, while equal and above 50 was categorized as anxiety. Daily living ability assessment was according to the basic Living activity ability (BADL) scale, where scores between 91 and 100 were indicators of good daily living function, between 61 and 90 were regarded as mild functional impairment, between 41 and 60 was labeled as moderate functional impairment, between 21 and 40 were considered as severe functional impairment, whereas patients with scores between 0 and 20 were grouped as completely disabled. Instrumental living ability assessment was according to the Instrumental Ability of Daily Living (IADL) scale was used to assess whether patients were able to go shopping, go out for activities, cook food, maintain household chores and wash clothes. Those who need assistance in 3 or more of these criteria were considered disabled. The sleep status assessment was done according to the Assens Insomnia Scale (AIS), where scores between 0 and 3 indicated good sleep, between 4 and 6 spoke for potential insomnia, whereas between 7 and 24 indicated insomnia. Fall risk assessment was according to the Morse Fall Risk Assessment Scale, where scores between 0 and 24 classified the patients at low risk of fall, between 25 and 44 categorized the patients at moderate risk, whereas scores equal and above ≥ 45 categorized the elderly people at severe risk. The balance function evaluation was agreeing with the Tinetti balance and gait scale, where scores less than 15 indicated the risk of falling, between 15 and 24 designated balance dysfunction, whereas scores ≥ 24 indicated good physical function. The visual simulation method was used for pain evaluation. Scores equal to 0 indicated lack of pain, between 1 and 3 designated mild pain, between 4 and 6 showed the presence of moderate pain, whereas between 7 and 10 indicated presence of severe pain. The evaluation of urinary incontinence was in harmony with the Incontinence Questionnaire Simple Form (ICI-Q-SF), where scores equal to 0 classified the patients into the group of asymptomaticurinary incontinence, between 1 and 7 determined the elderly people with mildurinary incontinence, between 8 and 14 indicated moderateurinary incontinence, whereas the scores between 15 and 21 indicated that the patients had severe urinary incontinence. Constipation was assessed using the Roma  = 3 \* ROMAN III Scale (≥2). Other parameters that were taken into account included falls (within the last 1 year), the number of chronic diseases, the coexistence of multiple diseases (≥ 2 diseases), multiple medications (≥ 5 oral medications), the number of medications and others. All these allowed to assess and diagnose frailty and evaluating scores are presented in Table 1.

Table 1  Contents of the Chinese version of Fried method for evaluation and classification of frailty among elderly people

variable

Overall

(n=288)

Non-Frailty(n=87)

Pre-Frailty(n=93)

Frailty(n=108)

χ2(F) value

P value

age a(years)

67.501

<0.001**

<75 years old

111(38.5)

50(67.8)

37(39.8)

15(13.9)

≥75,<85 years old

92(31.9)

24(27.6)

35(37.6)

33(30.6)

≥85 years old

82(29.5)

4(4.6)

21(22.6)

60(55.6)

gender b

1.527

0.466

male

173(60.1)

48(55.2)

56(60.2)

69(63.9)

Female

115(39.9)

39(44.8)

37(39.8)

39(36.1)

BMI a,mean ± SD

23.28±4.14

23.63±3.41

23.42±5.54

22.87±3.15

0.897

0.409

Education level b

7.599

0.269

illiteracy

12(4.2)

1(1.1)

6(6.5)

5(4.6)

primary school

155(53.8)

51(58.6)

44(47.3)

60(55.6)

Middle school

66(29.9)

15(17.2)

26(28.0)

25(23.1)

College degree and above

55(19.1)

20(23.0)

17(18.3)

18(16.7)

Vision condition b

9.617

0.008*

  normal

87(30.2)

24(27.6)

39(41.9)

24(22.2)

  decline

201(69.8)

63(72.4)

54(58.1)

84(77.8)

Hearing condition b

20.417

<0.001**

  normal

115(39.9)

48(55.2)

41(44.1)

26(24.1)

  decline

173(60.1)

39(44.8)

52(55.9)

82(75.9)

marital status b

4.667

0.097

  Married

222(77.1)

72(82.8)

74(79.6)

76(70.4)

Divorced/Widowed

66(22.9)

15(17.2)

19(20.4)

32(29.6)

Eating habits b

2.114

0.347

Light diet mainly

248(86.1)

71(81.6)

82(88.2)

95(88.0)

Mainly salty and greasy diet

40(13.9)

16(18.4)

11(11.8)

13(12.0)

sleeping time(h) a ,mean ± SD

6.74±1.69

7.08±1.78

7.19±2.09

1.459

0.234

Smoking status b

1.363

0.506

  Not currently smoking

224(77.8)

65(74.7)

76(81.7)

83(76.9)

  Current smoking

64(22.2)

22(25.3)

17(18.3)

25(23.1)

Drinking situation b

3.529

0.171

  Not currently drinking

242(84.0)

68(78.2)

82(88.2)

92(85.2)

  Current drinking

46(16.0)

19(21.8)

11(11.8)

16(14.8)

Number of chronic diseases (species) a,mean ± SD

7.72±3.39

6.70±3.59

7.46±3.45

8.75±4.23

7.297

0.001*

Polypharmacy(kind) b

14.734

0.001*

  No Polypharmacy

103(35.8)

44(50.6)

33(35.5)

26(24.1)

  There are Polypharmacy (≥5 species)

185(64.2)

43(49.4)

60(64.5)

82(75.9)

Note: The lack of compliance with any of the items listed in Table 1 indicated a lack of frailty. The compliance with 1 and/or 2 items indicated a pre-frailty condition, while the compliance with 3 items was firmly diagnosed as frailty; IPAQ = International Physical Activity Scale


2.2.3   Laboratory examination  

30 ml of fasting venous blood was collected from the hospitalized elderly patients from 6:00 to 8:00 am and sent to the clinical laboratory of our hospital for testing. The automatic analyzer Xiang Instrument L1550 was used for blood samples analyse. The blood was centrifuged at 3 500 r/min for 5 min. The detected parameters included the white blood cells (WBC) and red blood cells count (RBC), haemoglobin (Hb), platelets (PLT) and neutrophils count (NEUT), as well as the C-reactive protein (CRP). The aspartate (AST) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) were detected by the rate method. Triacylglycerols (TG) were detected by the deionization glycerol method, the total protein (TP) was detected by the biuret method, albumin (ALB) was detected by the bromocresol green method, while the total cholesterol (TC) was detected by the cholesterol oxidase method. High density (HDL) and low-density lipoproteins (LDL) were detected by the elimination method. Blood sodium (Na+), blood potassium (K+) and blood chlorine (Cl-) were detected by the ion-selective electrode method. Creatinine (Cr) and glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) were assayed by enzyme reactions. Urea nitrogen (BUN) was assayed by the urease UV rate method. Uric acid (UA) was assayed by enzyme calorimetry. Blood calcium (Ca2+) was assessed by the arsenazo ⅲ method. The Hexokinase method was used for assessing the amount of fasting blood glucose. Fructosamine was detected by the tetrazolium blue method. Thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH), triiodothyronine (T3), thyroid hormone (T4), free triiodothyronine (FT3), free thyroid hormone (FT4), ferritin, vitamin B12, folic acid, 25(OH)D, estradiol, testosterone, homocysteine (Hcy), fasting insulin (FINS) were detected by electrochemiluminescence. Activated partial thrombin time (APTT), prothrombin time (PT), thrombin time (TT) and D-dimer (DD2) were detected by the magnetic bead method or by immunoturbidimetry. Tumour necrosis factor (TNF), IL-10, IL-6, IL-12P70, IL-1 and IL-8 were detected by chemiluminescence.

2.2.4   Data quality control  

To assure the gathered data quality all assessment physicians passed the training programme for assessment of the Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment System Software Platform (Inpatient version). All incomplete or inconsistent data were regarded as invalid data and thus excluded from the study.

2.3  Statistical Methods  

SPSS 23.0 software was used for statistical analysis. The measurement data (


3   Results

152 elderly patients were included in the study, among them, 47 (30.9%) had no frailty, 51 (33.6%) had early frailty and 54 (35.6%) had frailty.

3.1   Comparison of general data and geriatric syndrome of patients with different degrees of frailty   

There were no significant differences in gender, height, body mass, BMI, education level, food or drug allergy, denture, marital status, eating habits, sleep time, use of sleeping supplementation, current smoking and alcohol consumption, present anxiety, fall, pain, urinary incontinence, constipation and multiple diseases among patients with different degrees of frailty (P > 0.05). There were statistically significant differences in age, visual impairment, hearing impairment, nutritional status, cognitive function, presence of anxiety and depression, presence of anxiety, daily living ability, disability, sleep status, fall risk, balance function, number of chronic diseases, multiple medications, number of medications(P <0.05). These data are shown in Table 2.

Table 2 Comparison of clinical data and geriatric syndromes in participants by level of frailty

frailty degree

no frailty (n=47)

pre-frailtyn=51

frailty (n=54)

χ2(F) value

P value

Age (±s, years)

74.45±8.035

80.29±8.81

85.17±7.06

22.678a

<0.001

Gendern(%)

1.263

0.532

male

2553.2

3262.7

3463.0

female

2246.8

1937.3

2037.0

height(±s,m)

1.60±0.88

1.61±0.06

1.62±0.08

0.815a

0.444

Body mass(±s,kg)

59.57±11.15

58.52±10.63

60.60±10.30

0.494

0.611

BMI( ±skg/m2

24.47±2.69

24.17±1.90

23.84±2.21

0.959a

0.385

Education leveln(%)

13.692

0.090

illiteracy

00.0

23.9

47.4

primary school

1736.2

1325.5

1833.3

junior high school

2042.6

1325.5

1324.1

high school

510.6

1529.4

916.7

College degree and above

510.6

815.7

1018.5

Food or medicineHistory of allergiesN(%)

1123.4

1325.5

1018.5

0.776

0.678

Vision lossN(%)

3063.8

3160.8

4481.5

6.138

0.046

Hearing lossN(%)

2553.2

3160.8

4481.5

9.790

0.007

Have false teethn%)〕

2553.2

2549.0

3361.1

1.602

0.449

Divorced/Widowed

817.0

1325.5

1629.6

2.224

0.329

Eating habitsn(%)

0.035

0.983

Light diet

4085.1

4486.3

4685.2

Greasy diet

714.9

713.7

814.8

sleeping time(±s,h/d)

6.55±1.84

7.18±2.17

7.22±1.81

1.794a

0.170

TakeSleeping aidsN(%)

817.0

917.6

1120.4

0.218

0.897

Current smokingN(%)

1327.7

1223.5

1731.5

0.829

0.661

Current drinking N (%)

919.1

1019.6

1120.4

0.024

0.988

Nutritional statusn(%)

30.644

<0.001

Good nutrition

2961.7

2345.1

1324.1

Potential malnutrition

1634.0

2651.0

2342.6

Severe malnutrition

24.3

23.9

1833.3

Cognitive functionn(%)

51.111

<0.001

Good cognitive function

3370.2

2141.2

138.6

Mild cognitive impairment

1327.7

2447.1

1324.1

Moderate cognitive impairment

12.1

611.8

1833.3

Severe cognitive impairment

00.0

0.0.0

1018.5

Anxiety and depression

N(%)

1940.4

3568.6

4379.6

17.495

<0.001

Existence suppression

DepressionN(%)

1838.3

3670.6

4277.8

18.654

<0.001

ExistenceWorry stateN(%)

24.3

35.9

59.3

1.084

0.581

Ability of daily living [n (%)]

87.800

<0.001

Good daily function

4085.1

2141.2

35.5

Mild dysfunction

510.6

2243.1

1935.2

Moderate dysfunction

24.3

611.8

713.0

Severe dysfunction

00.0

23.9

2546.3

DisabilityN(%)

919.1

2651.0

4890.6

51.821

<0.001

Sleep conditionn(%)

12.017

0.017

Sleep well

2961.7

1835.3

1629.6

Potential insomnia

714.9

1121.6

1425.9

Insomnia

1123.4

2243.1

2444.4

Nearly 1 yearFalln%)〕

714.9

917.6

59.3

1.616

0.446

Risk of falling [n(%)]

9.603

0.048

Low risk

3983.0

3772.5

3157.4

Moderate risk

612.8

611.8

1120.4

Severe risk

24.3

815.7

1222.2

Balance functionn(%)

16.314

0.003

Function well

2859.6

1937.3

1527.8

Balance disorder

1123.4

2345.1

1833.3

Risk of falling

817.0

917.6

2138.9

Have painN(%)

2656.5

2956.9

3259.3

0.094

0.954

Urinary incontinenceN(%)

36.4

917.6

1018.5

3.614

0.164

constipateN(%)

1123.4

1427.5

1629.6

0.503

0.778

Number of chronic diseases

(±s, kind)

4.87±2.29

5.86±2.12

6.39±2.80

4.985a

0.008

Multiple diseases coexist

N(%)

4595.7

51100.0

5296.3

2.104

0.349

Multi-drugN(%)

2451.1

3874.5

3666.7

6.046

0.049

Number of medications(±s, kind)

5.15±2.53

6.22±2.82

6.81±3.35

3.987

0.021

Note: Pain = mild pain + moderate pain + severe pain; urinary incontinence = mild urinary incontinence + moderate urinary incontinence + severe urinary incontinence; a represents F value; BMI = body mass index


3.2   Comparison of the laboratory examination indexes of the elderly patients with different degrees of frailty   

There were no significant differences in the WBC, RBC, PLT, NEUT, CRP, AST, TG, TP, TC, HDL, LDL, K+, Cr, HbA1c, BUN, UA, Ca2+, fasting blood glucose, glucosamine, TSH, T3, T4, FT3, FT4, ferritin, vitamin B12, folic acid, testosterone, FINS, TT, TNF, IL-10, IL-12P70, IL-1 among the studied patients with different degrees of frailty (P>0.05). Statistically significant differences were found in the Hb, ALT, ALB, Na+, Cl-, (25(OH)D, estradiol,  Hcy,, APTT, PT, DD2, IL-6 and IL-8 (P<0.05). These parameters and interactions are shown in Table 3.

Table 3 Comparison of the laboratory indicators in the elderly participants by the level of frailty

frailty degree

no frailty (n=47)

pre-frailtyn=51

frailty (n=54)

Z( F ) value

P value

WBC MP25P75),

×109 /L

6.825.267.76

6.164.897.22

5.935.077.26

1.520

0.285

RBCMP25P75),

×1012/L

4.343.994.64

4.394.074.71

4.103.444.59

8.158

0.077

Hbg/L

132.43±24.84

137.43±17.65

121.44±27.33

6.276

0.002

PLTMP25P75),

×109 /L

210.00168.00248.00

194.00151.00235.00

180.50137.00224.25

4.028

0.329

NEUTMP25P75),

×109 /L

4.542.745.35

3.812.954.71

4.092.954.96

1.487

0.084

CRPMP25P75), mg/L

2.350.5020.75

3.041.3111.42

11.172.6728.05

8.650

0.056

ASTMP25P75), U/L

20.0015.0027.00

19.0015.0024.00

18.5015.0026.00

0.419

0.770

ALT MP25P75,U/L

14.0010.0025.00

16.0010.0020.00

12.008.0019.00

4.242

0.030

TG MP25P75,mmol/L

1.180.851.84

1.250.851.96

1.100.741.61

2.263

0.439

TPg/L

64.28±7.07

63.48±6.60

63.72±9.38

0.133

0.875

ALBg/L

37.20±4.96

36.50±4.14

34.18±3.52

7.250

0.001

TCmmol/L

4.16±1.25

4.11±1.00

3.87±1.05

1.040

0.356

HDLmmol/L

1.08±0.37

1.05±0.28

1.00±0.28

0.803

0.450

LDLmmol/L

2.51±1.00

2.43±0.79

2.28±0.87

0.936

0.395

Na+mmol/L

139.34±2.96

139.51±2.87

137.33±4.02

6.844

0.001

K+mmol/L

3.96±0.47

4.00±0.45

3.97±0.49

0.034

0.966

Cl-MP25P75),

mmol/L

108.00106.00110.00

107.00105.00110.00

106.00102.75108.00

9.637

0.003

CrMP25P75,μmol/L

72.0060.0090.00

77.0063.0095.00

83.0067.50114.00

5.176

0.147

HbA1cMP25P75),%

6.255.827.75

6.315.817.74

6.025.576.82

4.246

0.160

BUNMP25P75),μmol/L

6.404.908.70

6.804.908.90

7.855.6810.10

3.946

0.225

UAMP25P75)μmol/L

362.00285.00425.00

396.00339.00457.00

346.00261.25504.75

4.083

0.069

Ca2+MP25P75),mmol/L

2.192.092.28

2.192.102.26

2.182.102.24

0.486

0.875

Fasting blood glucoseMP25P75, mmol/L]

5.404.606.80

4.904.406.60

4.854.206.00

3.010

0.140

FructosaminMP25P75,μmol/L]

1.601.461.76

1.551.441.66

1.541.371.70

1.231

0.786

TSHMP25P75),mU/L

2.831.494.38

2.731.504.51

2.281.304.51

0.231

0.544

T3MP25P75),nmol/L

1.040.811.30

0.950.801.28

0.960.721.16

2.450

0.277

T4MP25P75nmol/L

76.3366.6780.07

76.3365.5890.15

72.5564.1183.71

0.809

0.781

FT3MP25P75),pmol/L

4.373.924.97

4.293.414.77

4.173.164.70

3.854

0.776

FT4MP25P75),pmol/L

12.4110.8814.53

12.259.9214.72

13.2311.6715.14

2.435

0.238

APTTs

36.01±4.19

37.51±4.44

39.29±5.53

5.943

0.003

PTMP25P75),s

12.8012.2013.40

12.9012.4013.50

13.3012.7814.18

12.309

0.010

TTMP25P75),s

18.1017.2018.80

18.3017.6019.20

18.0017.1818.70

2.184

0.668

DD2(ug/ml)

1.180.902.11

1.331.002.06

2.001.294.39

16.137

0.009

FerritinMP25P75, ng/ml

237.07181.59418.50

225.9695.4337826

224.03106.48480.20

1.025

0.676

Vitamin B12MP25P75, pmol/L

297.00225.00498.77

344.00224.00462.00

394.50260.25924.50

5.727

0.654

Folic acid MP25P75,nmol/L

15.509.8022.80

15.509.6024.80

12.707.6828.25

0.733

0.325

25OHD(μg/L

22.72±9.69

19.60±9.42

17.14±6.59

5.282

0.006

Estradiol (Pmol/L)

111.61±53.60

125.17±62.47

149.60±52.97

5.919

0.003

Testosterone (nmol/L)

1.860.5113.24

2.840.5415.20

4.770.5713.51

0.162

0.776

HcyMP25P75),μmol/L

14.4011.9017.95

16.8014.2019.10

17.9515.0023.63

7.705

0.015

FINSMP25P75),U/L

6.924.9411.52

6.063.909.04

6.774.168.62

2.150

0.600

TNFMP25P75),ng/L

5.984.1812.87

6.324.1813.20

6.155.2010.39

0.597

0.832

IL-10MP25P75),ng/L

4.333.485.38

4.753.706.30

4.923.686.46

3.196

0.147

IL-6MP25P75,ng/L

12.615.9518.37

20.887.8234.01

25.2917.2146.79

31.520

<0.001

IL-12P70MP25P75),ng/L

5.223.575.92

4.992.045.80

5.564.646.32

4.078

0.165

IL-1ßMP25P75),ng/L

4.653.647.59

4.933.458.02

4.653.917.22

0.408

0.873

IL-8MP25P75),ng/L

19.4612.7738.93

41.6718.5390.28

25.6514.6460.40

8.685

0.008

Note: WBC=white blood cell count, RBC=red blood cell count, Hb=hemoglobin, PLT=platelet count, NEUT=neutrophil fraction, CRP=C reactive protein, AST=aspartate aminotransferase, ALT=alanine aminotransferase, TG=triacylglycerol, TP=total protein, ALB=albumin, TC=total cholesterol, HDL=high-density lipoprotein, LDL=low-density lipoprotein, Na+=serum sodium, K+=serum potassium, Cl-= blood chlorine, Cr= creatinine, HbA1c= glycosylated hemoglobin, BUN= urea nitrogen, UA= uric acid, Ca2+=blood calcium, TSH= thyroid stimulating hormone, T3= triiodothyronine, T4= thyroid hormone, FT3= Free triiodothyronine, FT4 = free thyroid hormone, 25 (OH) D = 25 hydroxyvitamin D, Hcy = homocysteine, FINS = fasting insulin, APTT = activated partial thromboplastin time, PT = coagulation proenzyme time, TT = thrombin time, DD2 = D-dimer, TNF = tumor necrosis factor, IL = interleukin; a represents F value


3.3   Binary Logistic regression analysis   

Taking frailty of elderly patients with stable chronic diseases as a dependent variable, where 1 indicated lack of frailty and 2 designated pre-frailty and frailty, all variables with statistically significant differences (P<0.05) demonstrated in Tables 1 and 2 were taken as independent variables. These included the age (assigned: measured value), vision (where 0 was normal and 1 was decreased), hearing (where 0 was normal and 1 was accepted as decreased), nutritional status (where 0 indicated good nutrition, 1 - potential malnutrition and 2 - malnutrition), cognitive function (where 0 was normal cognition and 1 was cognitive impairment), anxiety and depression states (where 0 was accepted as no anxiety and depression state, whereas 1 was classified with anxiety and depression state, depression state (where 0 indicated no depression state, whereas 1 indicated presence of such), daily living ability (where 0 was indicative of good daily life function, while 1signified dysfunction of daily life), disability (where 0 indicated not disabled and 1 - complete disability), sleep status (with 0 equal to good sleep, 1equal to potential insomnia, whereas 2 represented insomnia), risk of fall (where 0 indicated low risk, 1- moderate risk, while 2 indicated severe risk), balance function (where 0 stood for good physical function, 1 for balance dysfunction, whereas 2 indicated risk of fall), number of chronic diseases (measured value), multiple medications (where 0 indicated none and 1 indicated presence), number of medications (measured value), Hb (measured value), ALT (measured value), ALB (measured value), Na+ (measured value), Cl- (measured value), 25- (OH) D (measured value), estradiol (measured value), Hcy (measured value), APTT (measured value), PT (measured value), DD2 (measured value), IL-6 (measured value), IL-8 (measured value). Binary Logistic regression analysis showed that the disability, 25-(OH)D and IL-6 were the independent influencing factors in elderly patients with stable chronic diseases (P<0.05), as shown in Table 4.

Table 4 Binary logistic regression analysis of frailty in elderly patients with chronic disease

variable

β

SE

Wald x2 value

P value

OR95%CI

Disability

1.818

0.883

4.240

0.039

6.1621.09134.789

25-OHD

-0.104

0.045

5.238

0.022

0.9010.8250.985

IL-6

0.098

0.044

5.008

0.025

1.103(1.012,1.201)


4 Discussion

4.1   Occurrence of senile frailty and independent related factors  

Our results showed that the overall incidence of frailty in the studied hospitalized elderly patients was 35.6% (54/152), which was similar to the results of Lai Xiaoxing et al.[4], Wei Yin et al.[5]and others[6], where the estimated incidence rate was 31.3%, 34.4% and 35.4%, respectively, which was higher than that estimated one by Wang Wanwan et al.[7], whose calculations showed an incidence of the frailty of 25.1%. Interestingly, these estimations were lower than that by Jin Qiulu et al.[8], who found that the frailty rate of elderly patients (≥ 80 years old) was 41.6%. These differences in the prevalence and incidence rate of frailty among elderly people may be due to different assessment tools, age, and study subjects.However,overall, the prevalence of frailty in China is not optimistic.Considering that is often followed by a variety of adverse consequences[1-2], early screening, prevention and intervention can greatly reduce the prevalence and hospitalization rate of elderly people with frailty.

Other authors’ studies in the United States, Mexico, Australia and other countries have shown that Vitamin D (25(OH)D) is an independent factor affecting frailty[9][11]. In addition, another analysis involving that 20 355 subjects from 13 studies demonstrated a significant inverse relationship between the 25(OH)D levels in patients’ blood results and increased frailty severity (following Fried's phenotypic definition) in both the original analysis and sensitivity analysis[12]. The results of our study are consistent with those of the above. However, according to a cross-sectional study of community women aged ≥ 75 years in Belgium, there no relationship between low vitamin D levels and lower limb muscle strength and grip strength was estimated[13]. The reason for this variance may be that the study from Belgium only targeted community women ≥ 75 years. Moreover, the levels of 25(OH)D in the blood are influenced by multiple factors, such as gender, age, geography and others, therefore these results may be somewhat limited.

According to multiple other meta-analyses, frailty and early frailty were associated with higher levels of CRP and IL-6[14][15]. This was confirmed by a recent meta-analysis of 23 910 older adults, where the authors proved that frailty and pre-frailty were associated with higher levels of inflammatory factors, especially CRP and IL-6[16]. Our research results were similar to the above studies. Although CRP was not an independent risk factor for frailty in our study, the single factor comparison was still statistically significant (P<0.05). The reason for this difference may be that the sample size of this study, which we understand that is relatively small. Second, the subjects were elderly patients with stable chronic diseases, and CRP was an acute phase reactant[17], therefore it was possible to rise under a variety of pathophysiological conditions. Therefore, this non-specific inflammatory marker was not considered as necessarily related to frailty[18].

4.2   25(OH)D, IL-6 and senile frailty are interrelated in elderly patients   

25(OH)D is the major circulating metabolite of Vitamin D which is a globally recognized marker reflecting the Vitamin D status. Vitamin D deficiency is often associated with muscle weakness[19]. Vitamin D receptors (VDRs) are distributed in multiple target organs such as skin and muscles[20].VDRs act as nuclear receptor-mediated gene effects. VDRs bind to  (1,25-(OH)2D) to induce the proliferation and differentiation of muscle fiber, and also affect the synthesis of related proteins. On the other hand, VDRs can also activate signal transduction pathways that can induce MAP kinase and phospholipase C through non-nuclear receptor-mediated non-genetic effects, so that a large number of calcium ions can rapidly flow into cells and affect muscle contraction[21][22]. Therefore, the possible mechanisms of 25(OH)D deficiency leading to frailty are due to affected muscle strength, resulting in decreased grip strength [23][24] and because of reduced development of muscle cells, ultimately leading to unconscious weight loss[25]. In addition, Vitamin D deficiency can also cause osteolysis secondary to hyperparathyroidism, leading to osteoporosis and even fracture, which can aggravate the progression of frailty and osteoporosis, leading to disability and other adverse events.

IL-6 levels increase with age[14], and high IL-6 can be used as a predictor of both the occurrence of sarcopenia and the adverse outcomes of frailty and sarcopenia, such as disability, functional decline and even death[26]. IL-6 can inhibit TNF-α and IL-1β and induce the production of CRP, fibrinogen and other acute-phase reactants[14], it can also indirectly reduce growth hormone (GH) and insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) levels, reduce protein synthesis and lead to sarcopenia. In addition, increased serum IL-6 and CRP levels were also associated with decreased grip strength[27]. The study of Maet al.[28]included 130 elderly patients and showed that IL-6 was negatively correlated with the strength and gait speed of the frailty elderly. IL-6 levels were also inversely associated with exercise tolerance in older adults after adjustment for age and gender. Therefore, we suggested that IL-6 could be applied as a biomarker for functional decline and frailty.

All the above studies suggest that high IL-6 levels are associated with senile frailty, and Vitamin D deficiency may be involved in inflammation and immune system activation[29]. Moreover, data are suggesting that Vitamin D supplementation reduced the levels of IL-6 in peripheral blood, inhibiting the production of IL-6 by peripheral blood monocytes, macrophages and T cells[30][31], and thus upregulating the expression of anti-inflammatory factors (such as IL-10) and inflammatory suppressor molecules[32].

4.3 Vitamin D supplementation as an intervention for reducing senile frailty   

Some relevant epidemiological studies suggested that Vitamin D had a potential role in maintaining and improving muscle strength, function and physical performance, thus maintaining the independence of elderly people[33]. Other authors’ results demonstrated that the combined supplementation of elderly people with calcium and Vitamin D reduced the incidence of fractures and the risk of falls among them[34][36]. In addition, a randomized controlled trial of 5,615 participants showed only a slight improvement in the overall muscle strength after baseline Vitamin D supplementation[37]. Some data show that Vitamin D supplementation in elderly people may take longer or larger doses are needed before its beneficial effect on the muscles is present[38], to slow the progression of frailty[39]. Nonetheless, Cummingset al.[40]confirmed that the high-dose Vitamin D supplementation increased the risk of falls. Therefore, the ideal supplementation threshold for Vitamin D is a major question that needs special attention. According to the American Institute of Medicine, concentrations of 25(OH)D above 50 nmol/L are fully sufficient for human needs [41], while the American Endocrine Society sets the sufficient threshold above 72.5 nmol/L, the insufficiency threshold between 52.5 and 72.5 nmol/L, while the deficiency threshold is set at daily uptake concentrations less than 50 nmol/L[42]. Thus it can be seen that the dose critical value of vitamin D supplementation in the intervention of senile frailty needs further investigation.


5 Conclusion

The detected prevalence of senile frailty in hospitalized patients is not optimistic at all and is a burden to the medical and social systems in China. Therefore, the early screening, diagnosis and intervention of frailty are particularly essential. In this study, 25(OH)D and IL-6 were found to be independently correlated with frailty in elderly patients with stable chronic diseases. This indicates that 25(OH)D played as a protective factor of frailty in elderly patients with stable chronic diseases, while IL-6 was a risk factor. Therefore, 25(OH)D and IL-6 are expected to be predictors or objective biological indicators for the diagnosis of frailty in elderly patients with stable chronic diseases. In addition, Vitamin D supplementation may help prevent or delay senile frailty, though its dosage needs to be further discussed.


The innovativeness of this study can be summarized as follows:

1. The mobile software platform was successfully used to replace the traditional paper version for the evaluation of the senile frailty and related symptoms, which greatly reduced data collection time and statistical errors, thus increasing the reliability of the data.

2. The study of the senile frailty from the direction of the objective biomarkers in haematology and the mechanism of their action was described, which covered the lack of domestic research in this area.

3. This study proposed that 25-hydroxyvitamin D and interleukin-6 may be predictive or diagnostic factors of frailty in elderly patients with stable chronic diseases. Moreover, the hypothesis that Vitamin D supplementation of elderly patients may be a potential target for interventions is raised.

Like any other study, ours has some limitations too. The study was cross-sectional with a small sample size, which could not directly explore the causal relationship between the 25-hydroxyvitamin D, interleukin-6 and frailty. Second. it was a single-centre study with certain regional limitations. Finally, the subjects of this study were hospitalized elderly patients with stable chronic diseases, which could not represent the whole elderly population.


Author contribution: Dai Jingrong was responsible for the conception and design of the paper, the analysis and interpretation of the results, as well as the writing of the paper; Li Yan carried out the implementation and feasibility analysis of the research and was responsible for the quality control and review of the paper. Data collection was done by Li Jie, He Xu and Li Yang; He Xu and Li Yang, whosorted out and input data; Li Jie conducted the statistical processing and revised the paper; Dai Jingrong and Li Yan were responsible for the supervision and management of the article.

No conflict of interest is declared.

References

[1]      APÓSTOLO J,COOKE R,BOBROWICZ-CAMPOS E,et al. Effectiveness of interventions to prevent pre-frailty and frailty progression in older adults:a systematic review[J]. JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep,2018,16(1):140-232. DOI:10.11124/JBISRIR-2017-003382.

[2]      HOOGENDIJK E O,AFILALO J,ENSRUD K E,et al. Frailty:implications for clinical practice and public health[J].Lancet,2019,394(10206):1365-1375. DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(19)31786-6.

[3]      FRIED L P,TANGEN C M,WALSTON J,et al. Frailty in older adults:evidence for a phenotype[J]. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci,2001,56(3):M146-156. DOI:10.1093/gerona/56.3.m146.

[4]      LAI X X,BO L,ZHU H W,et al. Relationship between sleep disorders and frailty in elderly inpatients[J]. Pract Geriatr, 2021,35(1):24-27.

[5]      WEI Y,CAO Y P,YANG X L,et al. Frailty syndrome in hospitalized geriatric patients and its risk factors[J]. Fudan Univ J Med Sci,2018,45(4):496-502.

[6]      VU H T T,NGUYEN T X,NGUYEN T N,et al. Prevalence of frailty and its associated factors in older hospitalised patients in Vietnam[J]. BMC Geriatr,2017,17(1):216. DOI: 10.1186/s12877-017-0609-y.

[7]      WANG W W,LI Y Y,SHI X T,et al. Frailty-related factors and degree of association of frailty with malnutrition in elderly inpatients[J]. Chinese General Practice,2021,24(6):678- 684. DOI:10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2020.00.594

[8]      JIN Q L,HU S,CHEN R,et al. Comprehensive geriatric assessment for screening risk factors and frailty in elderly inpatients[J]. Chinese General Practice,2018,21(27): 3296-3301. DOI:10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2018.00.150.

[9]      KOJIMA G,TANABE M.Frailty is highly prevalent and associated with vitamin D deficiency in male nursing home residents[J]. J Am Geriatr Soc,2016,64(9):e33-35. DOI:10.1111/jgs.14268.

[10]  WONG Y Y,MCCAUL K A,YEAP B B,et al. Low vitamin D status is an independent predictor of increased frailty and allcause mortality in older men:the Health in Men Study[J]. J Clin Endocrinol Metab,2013,98(9):3821-3828. DOI:10.1210/ jc.2013-1702.

[11]  GUTIÉRREZ-ROBLEDO L M,ÁVILA-FUNES J A,AMIEVA H,et al. Association of low serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels with the frailty syndrome in Mexican community-dwelling elderly[J]. Aging Male,2016,19(1):58-63. DOI: 10.3109/13685538.2015.1105796.

[12]  SMIT E,CRESPO C J,MICHAEL Y,et al. The effect of vitamin D and frailty on mortality among non-institutionalized US older adults[J]. Eur J Clin Nutr,2012,66(9):1024-1028. DOI:10.1038/ejcn.2012.67.

[13]  MATHEÏ C,VAN POTTELBERGH G,VAES B,et al. No relation between vitamin D status and physical performance in the oldest old:results from the Belfrail study[J]. Age Ageing, 2013,42(2):186-190. DOI:10.1093/ageing/afs186.

[14]  SOYSAL P,STUBBS B,LUCATO P,et al. Inflammation and frailty in the elderly:a systematic review and metaanalysis[J]. Ageing Res Rev,2016,31:1-8. DOI:10.1016/j. arr.2016.08.006.

[15]  MARCOS-PÉREZ D,SÁNCHEZ-FLORES M,PROIETTI S,et al. Association of inflammatory mediators with frailty status in older adults:results from a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Geroscience,2020,42(6):1451-1473. DOI:10.1007/ s11357-020-00247-4.

[16]  SOYSAL P,ARIK F,SMITH L,et al. Inflammation,frailty and cardiovascular disease[J]. Adv Exp Med Biol,2020,1216: 55-64. DOI:10.1007/978-3-030-33330-0_7.

[17]  KANE A E,SINCLAIR D A.Frailty biomarkers in humans and rodents:Current approaches and future advances[J].Mech Ageing Dev,2019,180:117-128. DOI:10.1016/j. mad.2019.03.007.

[18]  BAYLIS D,BARTLETT D B,SYDDALL H E,et al. Immuneendocrine biomarkers as predictors of frailty and mortality:a 10- year longitudinal study in community-dwelling older people[J]. Age (Dordr),2013,35(3):963-971. DOI:10.1007/ s11357-012-9396-8.

[19]  WIMALAWANSA S J,RAZZAQUE M S,AL-DAGHRI N M.Calcium and vitamin D in human health:hype or real?[J]. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol,2018,180:4-14. DOI:10.1016/j. jsbmb.2017.12.009.

[20]  ABRAMS G D,FELDMAN D,SAFRAN M R.Effects of vitamin D on skeletal muscle and athletic performance[J]. J Am Acad Orthop Surg,2018,26(8):278-285. DOI: 10.5435/JAAOS-D-16-00464.

[21]  CEGLIA L,HARRIS S S.Vitamin D and its role in skeletal muscle[J]. Calcif Tissue Int,2013,92(2):151-162. DOI: 10.1007/s00223-012-9645-y.

[22]  HAMILTON B.Vitamin D and human skeletal muscle[J]. Scand J Med Sci Sports,2010,20(2):182-190. DOI:10.1111/ j.1600-0838.2009.01016.x.

[23]  VITALE C,JANKOWSKA E,HILL L,et al. Heart Failure Association/European Society of Cardiology position paper on frailty in patients with heart failure[J]. Eur J Heart Fail,2019,21(11): 1299-1305. DOI:10.1002/ejhf.1611.

[24]  K I T S U T , K A B A S A W A K , I T O Y , e t a l . L o w s e r u m 25-hydroxyvitamin D is associated with low grip strength in an older Japanese population[J]. J Bone Miner Metab,2020,38(2): 198-204. DOI:10.1007/s00774-019-01040-w.

[25]  CEGLIA L,HARRIS S S.Vitamin D and its role in skeletal muscle[J]. Calcif Tissue Int,2013,92(2):151-162. DOI: 10.1007/s00223-012-9645-y.

[26]  CESARI M,KRITCHEVSKY S B,NICKLAS B,et al. Oxidative damage,platelet activation,and inflammation to predict mobility disability and mortality in older persons:results from the health aging and body composition study[J]. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci,2012,67(6):671-676. DOI:10.1093/gerona/glr246.

[27]  TIAINEN K,HURME M,HERVONEN A,et al. Inflammatory markers and physical performance among nonagenarians[J]. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci,2010,65(6):658-663. DOI: 10.1093/gerona/glq056.

[28]  MA L N,SHA G M,ZHANG Y X,et al. Elevated serum IL-6 and adiponectin levels are associated with frailty and physical function in Chinese older adults[J]. Clin Interv Aging,2018,13:2013- 2020. DOI:10.2147/CIA.S180934.

[29]  BRUYÈRE O,CAVALIER E,BUCKINX F,et al. Relevance of vitamin D in the pathogenesis and therapy of frailty[J]. Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care,2017,20(1):26-29. DOI: 10.1097/MCO.0000000000000334.

[30]  PARTAN R U,HIDAYAT R,SAPUTRA N,et al. Seluang fish (Rasbora spp.) oil decreases inflammatory cytokines via increasing vitamin D level in systemic lupus erythematosus[J].Open Access Maced J Med Sci,2019,7(9):1418-1421. DOI:10.3889/oamjms.2019.308.

[31]  MOTAMED S,NIKOOYEH B,KASHANIAN M,et al. Efficacy of two different doses of oral vitamin D supplementation on inflammatory biomarkers and maternal and neonatal outcomes[J]. Matern Child Nutr,2019,15(4):e12867. DOI:10.1111/mcn.12867.

[32]  VANHERWEGEN A S,GYSEMANS C,MATHIEU C.Vitamin D endocrinology on the cross-road between immunity and metabolism[J]. Mol Cell Endocrinol,2017,453:52-67. DOI:10.1016/j.mce.2017.04.018.

[33]  POJEDNIC R M,CEGLIA L.The emerging biomolecular role of vitamin D in skeletal muscle[J]. Exerc Sport Sci Rev,2014,42 (2):76-81. DOI:10.1249/JES.0000000000000013.

[34]  BISCHOFF-FERRARI H A,ORAV E J,ABDERHALDEN L, et al. Vitamin D supplementation and musculoskeletal health[J]. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol,2019,7(2):85. DOI:10.1016/ s2213-8587(18)30347-4.

[35]  WEAVER C M,ALEXANDER D D,BOUSHEY C J,et al. Calcium plus vitamin D supplementation and risk of fractures: an updated meta-analysis from the National Osteoporosis Foundation[J]. Osteoporos Int,2016,27(1):367-376. DOI:10.1007/s00198-015-3386-5.

[36]  MURAD M H,ELAMIN K B,ABU ELNOUR N O,et al. Clinical review:the effect of vitamin D on Falls:a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. J Clin Endocrinol Metab,2011,96(10): 2997-3006. DOI:10.1210/jc.2011-1193.

[37]  BEAUDART C,BUCKINX F,RABENDA V,et al. The effects of vitamin D on skeletal muscle strength,muscle mass,and muscle power:a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials[J]. J Clin Endocrinol Metab,2014,99(11): 4336-4345. DOI:10.1210/jc.2014-1742.

[38]  REMELLI F,VITALI A,ZURLO A,et al. Vitamin D deficiency and sarcopenia in older persons[J]. Nutrients,2019,11(12): E2861. DOI:10.3390/nu11122861.

[39]  SELDEEN K L,BERMAN R N,PANG M H,et al. Vitamin D insufficiency reduces grip strength,grip endurance and increases frailty in aged C57Bl/6J mice[J]. Nutrients,2020,12(10): E3005. DOI:10.3390/nu12103005.

[40]  CUMMINGS S R,KIEL D P,BLACK D M.Vitamin D supplementation and increased risk of falling:a cautionary tale of vitamin supplements retold[J]. JAMA Intern Med,2016,176(2): 171-172. DOI:10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.7568.

[41]  Dietary reference intakes for calcium and vitamin D[M]. Washington,D.C.:National Academies Press,2011.

[42]  HOLICK M F,BINKLEY N C,BISCHOFF-FERRARI H A,et al. Evaluation,treatment,and prevention of vitamin D deficiency:an Endocrine Society clinical practice guideline[J]. J Clin Endocrinol Metab,2011,96(7):1911-1930. DOI:10.1210/jc.2011- 0385.



Key words: Frailty, Aged, Chronic disease, 25-hydroxy-vitamin D, Vitamin D, Interleukin-6