Does more education mean less disability in people with dementia? A large cross-sectional study in Taiwan

Shih Wei Huang, Wen Chou Chi, Chia Feng Yen, Kwang Hwa Chang, Hua Fang Liao, Reuben Escorpizo, Feng Hang Chang, Tsan Hon Liou

Research output: Research - peer-reviewArticle

Abstract

Background: WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) is a feasible tool for assessing functional disability and analysing the risk of institutionalisation among elderly patients with dementia. However, the data for the effect of education on disability status in patients with dementia is lacking. The aim of this large-scale, population-based study was to analyse the effect of education on the disability status of elderly Taiwanese patients with dementia by using WHODAS 2.0. Methods: From the Taiwan Data Bank of Persons with Disability, we enrolled 7698 disabled elderly (older than 65 years) patients diagnosed with dementia between July 2012 and January 2014. According to their education status, we categorised these patients with and without formal education (3849 patients each). We controlled for the demographic variables through propensity score matching. The standardised scores of these patients in the six domains of WHODAS 2.0 were evaluated by certified interviewers. Student's t-test was used for comparing the WHODAS 2.0 scores of patients with dementia in the two aforementioned groups. Poisson regression was applied for analysing the association among all the investigated variables. Results: Patients with formal education had low disability status in the domains of getting along and social participation than did patients without formal education. Poisson regression revealed that standardised scores in all domains of WHODAS 2.0 - except self-care - were associated with education status. Conclusions: This study revealed lower disability status in the WHODAS 2.0 domains of getting along and social participation for patients with dementia with formal education compared with those without formal education. For patients with disability and dementia without formal education, community intervention of social participation should be implemented to maintain better social interaction ability.

LanguageEnglish
Article numbere013841
JournalBMJ Open
Volume7
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 2017

Fingerprint

Disabled Persons
Taiwan
Dementia
Cross-Sectional Studies
Education
Appointments and Schedules
Social Participation
Institutionalization
Propensity Score
Patient Education
Interpersonal Relations
Self Care
Demography
Databases
Interviews
Students
Population
Social Skills

Keywords

  • Dementia < NEUROLOGY
  • education
  • ICF
  • Taiwan
  • World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0)

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Does more education mean less disability in people with dementia? A large cross-sectional study in Taiwan. / Huang, Shih Wei; Chi, Wen Chou; Yen, Chia Feng; Chang, Kwang Hwa; Liao, Hua Fang; Escorpizo, Reuben; Chang, Feng Hang; Liou, Tsan Hon.

In: BMJ Open, Vol. 7, No. 4, e013841, 01.05.2017.

Research output: Research - peer-reviewArticle

@article{ede6ca1f3f424f9fa5712f93d9ba9437,
title = "Does more education mean less disability in people with dementia? A large cross-sectional study in Taiwan",
abstract = "Background: WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) is a feasible tool for assessing functional disability and analysing the risk of institutionalisation among elderly patients with dementia. However, the data for the effect of education on disability status in patients with dementia is lacking. The aim of this large-scale, population-based study was to analyse the effect of education on the disability status of elderly Taiwanese patients with dementia by using WHODAS 2.0. Methods: From the Taiwan Data Bank of Persons with Disability, we enrolled 7698 disabled elderly (older than 65 years) patients diagnosed with dementia between July 2012 and January 2014. According to their education status, we categorised these patients with and without formal education (3849 patients each). We controlled for the demographic variables through propensity score matching. The standardised scores of these patients in the six domains of WHODAS 2.0 were evaluated by certified interviewers. Student's t-test was used for comparing the WHODAS 2.0 scores of patients with dementia in the two aforementioned groups. Poisson regression was applied for analysing the association among all the investigated variables. Results: Patients with formal education had low disability status in the domains of getting along and social participation than did patients without formal education. Poisson regression revealed that standardised scores in all domains of WHODAS 2.0 - except self-care - were associated with education status. Conclusions: This study revealed lower disability status in the WHODAS 2.0 domains of getting along and social participation for patients with dementia with formal education compared with those without formal education. For patients with disability and dementia without formal education, community intervention of social participation should be implemented to maintain better social interaction ability.",
keywords = "Dementia < NEUROLOGY, education, ICF, Taiwan, World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0)",
author = "Huang, {Shih Wei} and Chi, {Wen Chou} and Yen, {Chia Feng} and Chang, {Kwang Hwa} and Liao, {Hua Fang} and Reuben Escorpizo and Chang, {Feng Hang} and Liou, {Tsan Hon}",
year = "2017",
month = "5",
doi = "10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013841",
volume = "7",
journal = "BMJ Open",
issn = "2044-6055",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Does more education mean less disability in people with dementia? A large cross-sectional study in Taiwan

AU - Huang,Shih Wei

AU - Chi,Wen Chou

AU - Yen,Chia Feng

AU - Chang,Kwang Hwa

AU - Liao,Hua Fang

AU - Escorpizo,Reuben

AU - Chang,Feng Hang

AU - Liou,Tsan Hon

PY - 2017/5/1

Y1 - 2017/5/1

N2 - Background: WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) is a feasible tool for assessing functional disability and analysing the risk of institutionalisation among elderly patients with dementia. However, the data for the effect of education on disability status in patients with dementia is lacking. The aim of this large-scale, population-based study was to analyse the effect of education on the disability status of elderly Taiwanese patients with dementia by using WHODAS 2.0. Methods: From the Taiwan Data Bank of Persons with Disability, we enrolled 7698 disabled elderly (older than 65 years) patients diagnosed with dementia between July 2012 and January 2014. According to their education status, we categorised these patients with and without formal education (3849 patients each). We controlled for the demographic variables through propensity score matching. The standardised scores of these patients in the six domains of WHODAS 2.0 were evaluated by certified interviewers. Student's t-test was used for comparing the WHODAS 2.0 scores of patients with dementia in the two aforementioned groups. Poisson regression was applied for analysing the association among all the investigated variables. Results: Patients with formal education had low disability status in the domains of getting along and social participation than did patients without formal education. Poisson regression revealed that standardised scores in all domains of WHODAS 2.0 - except self-care - were associated with education status. Conclusions: This study revealed lower disability status in the WHODAS 2.0 domains of getting along and social participation for patients with dementia with formal education compared with those without formal education. For patients with disability and dementia without formal education, community intervention of social participation should be implemented to maintain better social interaction ability.

AB - Background: WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0) is a feasible tool for assessing functional disability and analysing the risk of institutionalisation among elderly patients with dementia. However, the data for the effect of education on disability status in patients with dementia is lacking. The aim of this large-scale, population-based study was to analyse the effect of education on the disability status of elderly Taiwanese patients with dementia by using WHODAS 2.0. Methods: From the Taiwan Data Bank of Persons with Disability, we enrolled 7698 disabled elderly (older than 65 years) patients diagnosed with dementia between July 2012 and January 2014. According to their education status, we categorised these patients with and without formal education (3849 patients each). We controlled for the demographic variables through propensity score matching. The standardised scores of these patients in the six domains of WHODAS 2.0 were evaluated by certified interviewers. Student's t-test was used for comparing the WHODAS 2.0 scores of patients with dementia in the two aforementioned groups. Poisson regression was applied for analysing the association among all the investigated variables. Results: Patients with formal education had low disability status in the domains of getting along and social participation than did patients without formal education. Poisson regression revealed that standardised scores in all domains of WHODAS 2.0 - except self-care - were associated with education status. Conclusions: This study revealed lower disability status in the WHODAS 2.0 domains of getting along and social participation for patients with dementia with formal education compared with those without formal education. For patients with disability and dementia without formal education, community intervention of social participation should be implemented to maintain better social interaction ability.

KW - Dementia < NEUROLOGY

KW - education

KW - ICF

KW - Taiwan

KW - World Health Organization Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0 (WHODAS 2.0)

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85018394169&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85018394169&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013841

DO - 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-013841

M3 - Article

VL - 7

JO - BMJ Open

T2 - BMJ Open

JF - BMJ Open

SN - 2044-6055

IS - 4

M1 - e013841

ER -