Projection of young-old and old-old with functional disability: does accounting for the changing educational composition of the elderly population make a difference?

Abstract

This study compares projections, up to year 2040, of young-old (aged 60-79) and old-old (aged 80+) with functional disability in Singapore with and without accounting for the changing educational composition of the Singaporean elderly. Two multi-state population models, with and without accounting for educational composition respectively, were developed, parameterized with age-gender-(education)-specific transition probabilities (between active, functional disability and death states) estimated from two waves (2009 and 2011) of a nationally representative survey of community-dwelling Singaporeans aged ≥ 60 years (N=4,990). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis with the bootstrap method was used to obtain the 95% confidence interval of the transition probabilities. Not accounting for educational composition overestimated the young-old with functional disability by 65 percent and underestimated the old-old by 20 percent in 2040. Accounting for educational composition, the proportion of old-old with functional disability increased from 40.8 percent in 2000 to 64.4 percent by 2040; not accounting for educational composition, the proportion in 2040 was 49.4 percent. Since the health profiles, and hence care needs, of the old-old differ from those of the young-old, health care service utilization and expenditure and the demand for formal and informal caregiving will be affected, impacting health and long-term care policy.

Department

Description

Provenance

Citation

Published Version (Please cite this version)

10.1371/journal.pone.0126471

Publication Info

Ansah, John P, Rahul Malhotra, Nicola Lew, Chi-Tsun Chiu, Angelique Chan, Steffen Bayer and David B Matchar (2015). Projection of young-old and old-old with functional disability: does accounting for the changing educational composition of the elderly population make a difference?. PloS one, 10(5). p. e0126471. 10.1371/journal.pone.0126471 Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10161/22830.

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.

Scholars@Duke

Matchar

David Bruce Matchar

Professor of Medicine

My research relates to clinical practice improvement - from the development of clinical policies to their implementation in real world clinical settings. Most recently my major content focus has been cerebrovascular disease. Other major clinical areas in which I work include the range of disabling neurological conditions, cardiovascular disease, and cancer prevention.
Notable features of my work are: (1) reliance on analytic strategies such as meta-analysis, simulation, decision analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis; (2) a balancing of methodological rigor the needs of medical professionals; and (3) dependence on interdisciplinary groups of experts.
This approach is best illustrated by the Stroke Prevention Patient Outcome Research Team (PORT), for which I served as principal investigator. Funded by the AHCPR, the PORT involved 35 investigators at 13 institutions. The Stroke PORT has been highly productive and has led to a stroke prevention project funded as a public/private partnership by the AHCPR and DuPont Pharma, the Managing Anticoagulation Services Trial (MAST). MAST is a practice improvement trial in 6 managed care organizations, focussing on optimizing anticoagulation for individuals with atrial fibrillation.
I serve as consultant in the general area of analytic strategies for clinical policy development, as well as for specific projects related to stroke (e.g., acute stroke treatment, management of atrial fibrillation, and use of carotid endarterectomy.) I have worked with AHCPR (now AHRQ), ACP, AHA, AAN, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, NSA, WHO, and several pharmaceutical companies.
Key Words: clinical policy, disease management, stroke, decision analysis, clinical guidelines


Unless otherwise indicated, scholarly articles published by Duke faculty members are made available here with a CC-BY-NC (Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial) license, as enabled by the Duke Open Access Policy. If you wish to use the materials in ways not already permitted under CC-BY-NC, please consult the copyright owner. Other materials are made available here through the author’s grant of a non-exclusive license to make their work openly accessible.