↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Comparison of hydration and nutritional status between young and elderly hemodialysis patients through bioimpedance analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Clinical Interventions in Aging, January 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
85 Mendeley
citeulike
1 CiteULike
Title
Comparison of hydration and nutritional status between young and elderly hemodialysis patients through bioimpedance analysis
Published in
Clinical Interventions in Aging, January 2015
DOI 10.2147/cia.s86229
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jung Eun Lee, Sung Kyu Ha, Songmi Lee, Hyeong Cheon Park, Hoon Young Choi, In Young Jo, Hyung Jong Kim, Woojeong Kim

Abstract

The number of elderly people on dialysis is increasing rapidly. Fluid overload and malnutrition status are serious problems in elderly dialysis patients. We aimed to compare the hydration and nutritional status through bioimpedance analysis (BIA) between young and elderly hemodialysis (HD) patients and to analyze risk factors related to fluid overload and malnutrition status in these patients. We conducted a cross-sectional study, in which 82 HD (males 42, mean age 58.7±12.9 years) patients were enrolled. We collected different types of data: laboratory data, such as serum creatinine, albumin, total iron-binding capacity, hemoglobin, total cholesterol; anthropometric data, such as hand grip strength (HGS); BIA data, such as intracellular water, skeletal muscle mass, body cell mass, bone mineral content, phase angle (PhA), extra cellular water (ECW)/total body water (TBW) ratio; and malnutrition-inflammation score (MIS), which is a traditional nutritional parameter for dialysis patients. All patients were stratified into two groups according to their age: young (<65 years [n=54]) and elderly (≥65 years [n=28]). Total iron-binding capacity and HGS were significantly lower in elderly HD patients than in young HD patients (198.9±35.6 vs 221.4±52.1 mcg/dL; and 22.4±10.3 vs 36.4±23.2 kg, respectively) (P<0.05). Also, intracellular water and PhA measured by BIA were significantly lower (18.3±4.0 vs 20.3±4.2 L [P=0.043]; and 4.0±1.0 vs 4.9±1.2° [P=0.002], respectively), and ECW/TBW were higher in elderly HD patients (0.40±0.01 vs 0.39±0.01 [P=0.001]). ECW/TBW was positively associated with age (P<0.001) and the presence of diabetes (P<0.001) and was negatively associated with sex (P=0.001), albumin (P<0.001), urine volume (P=0.042), HGS (P<0.001), and PhA by BIA (P<0.001). MIS was negatively related to sex (P=0.001), albumin (P<0.001), HGS (P=0.001), and PhA (P<0.001) in HD patients. On multivariate analysis, older age (P=0.031), the presence of diabetes (P=0.035), and decreased PhA (P<0.001) were independent risk factors for increased ECW/TBW, representative of fluid overload status, whereas only decreased PhA (P=0.008) was a significant factor for MIS, representative of malnutrition status in these HD patients. We found that fluid overload and malnutrition status were more common in elderly HD patients compared with young HD patients. PhA was a significant independent factor in fluid overload status and malnutrition in these HD patients. Thus, our results indicated that PhA assessed by BIA might be a clinically useful method for assessing nutritional and hydration status in elderly HD patients.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 85 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 1 1%
Unknown 84 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 18 21%
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 15%
Researcher 8 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 8%
Student > Bachelor 7 8%
Other 15 18%
Unknown 17 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 30 35%
Nursing and Health Professions 12 14%
Sports and Recreations 5 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 5%
Physics and Astronomy 3 4%
Other 8 9%
Unknown 23 27%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 August 2015.
All research outputs
#3,858,228
of 5,482,709 outputs
Outputs from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#616
of 794 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#132,582
of 192,038 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Clinical Interventions in Aging
#52
of 68 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 5,482,709 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 794 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 192,038 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 68 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 2nd percentile – i.e., 2% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.