English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This study aimed to explore whether being housebound is a risk factor for disabilities and whether low social communication increases incidence of disability in elderly people. A self-reported questionnaire regarding demographic characteristics was administered to 2,046 community-dwelling elderly people (aged 65 and older) in October 2000, and subjects were followed up until March 2003. All subjects were independent in activities of daily living. In this study, being housebound was defined on frequency of going out, with those who left the house once or less per week being classified as housebound. We further classified the housebound into four groups: I, going out alone is difficult but social communication occurs; II going out alone is difficult and no social communication occurs; III, going out alone is possible but not undertaken often, and some social communication occurs; and IV, going out alone is possible but seldom undertaken and no social communication occurs. In this population, overall prevalence of being housebound was 8.5%, and about half of those who were housebound fit the third classification. At the end of the follow-up period, 12.7% of subjects reported disabilities. The incidence of disability was higher in the housebound compared with the non-housebound. The incidence of disability by age was higher in housebound groups than in the non-housebound in elderly individuals aged under 85, but no significant differences were recognized in those aged over 85. In terms of housebound status, all housebound groups had higher levels of disability than the non-housebound. However, the groups without social communication (H and IV) exhibited higher incidence of disability than those with social communication (I and II). From the results obtained, we conclude that being housebound is a risk factor for disability in elderly individuals aged 65 to 85 years who are living independently, and that lower social communication also represents a risk factor for disability. This study appears to indicate that a frequency of going out of once or less a week is a valid guide for determination of housebound status.

Incidence of disability in housebound elderly people living in a rural community