ALERT: This system is being upgraded on Tuesday December 12. It will not be available
for use for several hours that day while the upgrade is in progress. Deposits to DukeSpace
will be disabled on Monday December 11, so no new items are to be added to the repository
while the upgrade is in progress. Everything should be back to normal by the end of
day, December 12.
Physical and cognitive functioning of people older than 90 years: a comparison of two Danish cohorts born 10 years apart.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A rapidly increasing proportion of people in high-income countries are
surviving into their tenth decade. Concern is widespread that the basis for this development
is the survival of frail and disabled elderly people into very old age. To investigate
this issue, we compared the cognitive and physical functioning of two cohorts of Danish
nonagenarians, born 10 years apart. METHODS: People in the first cohort were born
in 1905 and assessed at age 93 years (n=2262); those in the second cohort were born
in 1915 and assessed at age 95 years (n=1584). All cohort members were eligible irrespective
of type of residence. Both cohorts were assessed by surveys that used the same design
and assessment instrument, and had almost identical response rates (63%). Cognitive
functioning was assessed by mini-mental state examination and a composite of five
cognitive tests that are sensitive to age-related changes. Physical functioning was
assessed by an activities of daily living score and by physical performance tests
(grip strength, chair stand, and gait speed). FINDINGS: The chance of surviving from
birth to age 93 years was 28% higher in the 1915 cohort than in the 1905 cohort (6·50%
vs 5·06%), and the chance of reaching 95 years was 32% higher in 1915 cohort (3·93%
vs 2·98%). The 1915 cohort scored significantly better on the mini-mental state examination
than did the 1905 cohort (22·8 [SD 5·6] vs 21·4 [6·0]; p<0·0001), with a substantially
higher proportion of participants obtaining maximum scores (28-30 points; 277 [23%]
vs 235 [13%]; p<0·0001). Similarly, the cognitive composite score was significantly
better in the 1915 than in the 1905 cohort (0·49 [SD 3·6] vs 0·01 [SD 3·6]; p=0·0003).
The cohorts did not differ consistently in the physical performance tests, but the
1915 cohort had significantly better activities of daily living scores than did the
1905 cohort (2·0 [SD 0·8] vs 1·8 [0·7]; p<0·0001). INTERPRETATION: Despite being 2
years older at assessment, the 1915 cohort scored significantly better than the 1905
cohort on both the cognitive tests and the activities of daily living score, which
suggests that more people are living to older ages with better overall functioning.
FUNDING: Danish National Research Foundation; US National Institutes of Health-National
Institute on Aging; Danish Agency for Science, Technology and Innovation; VELUX Foundation.
Type
Journal articleSubject
Activities of Daily LivingAged, 80 and over
Cognition
Denmark
Female
Humans
Longevity
Male
Motor Activity
Neuropsychological Tests
Surveys and Questionnaires
Time Factors
Permalink
https://hdl.handle.net/10161/14712Published Version (Please cite this version)
10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60777-1Publication Info
Christensen, Kaare; Thinggaard, Mikael; Oksuzyan, Anna; Steenstrup, Troels; Andersen-Ranberg,
Karen; Jeune, Bernard; ... Vaupel, James W (2013). Physical and cognitive functioning of people older than 90 years: a comparison of
two Danish cohorts born 10 years apart. Lancet, 382(9903). pp. 1507-1513. 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)60777-1. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10161/14712.This is constructed from limited available data and may be imprecise. To cite this
article, please review & use the official citation provided by the journal.
Collections
More Info
Show full item recordScholars@Duke
James Walton Vaupel
Research Professor Emeritus in the Sanford School of Public Policy
This author no longer has a Scholars@Duke profile, so the information shown here reflects
their Duke status at the time this item was deposited.

Articles written by Duke faculty are made available through the campus open access policy. For more information see: Duke Open Access Policy
Rights for Collection: Scholarly Articles
Works are deposited here by their authors, and represent their research and opinions, not that of Duke University. Some materials and descriptions may include offensive content. More info