Skip to main content

Table 1 Socio-demographic characteristics according to nutritional status, QOL and MNA & QOL of the elderly in South Korea (N = 143)

From: Association between combinations of nutritional status and quality of life and food purchasing motives among the elderly in South Korea

 Nutritional statusa QOLb Nutritional status & QOLc 
High (N = 63)Low (N = 68)PdHigh (N = 71)Low (N = 70)PBest (N = 41)Worst (N = 45)P
Femalee66.766.20.95354.974.30.01658.571.10.177
Agef74.4 ± 4.775.9 ± 6.20.10573.6 ± 5.576.5 ± 5.20.00173.4 ± 5.177.0 ± 5.90.003
  < 80 years88.973.50.02587.375.70.07690.268.90.072
  ≥ 80 years11.126.512.724.39.831.1
Disease (multiple response)82.085.30.60974.392.80.00372.588.90.027
 Diabetes21.320.60.92017.124.60.27712.517.80.107
 Hypertension57.447.10.24251.453.60.79652.546.70.478
 Hyperlipidemia13.117.60.4788.621.70.0307.520.00.277
 Gastrointestinal disease4.911.80.16410.05.80.3595.06.70.095
 Stroke1.616.20.0052.915.90.0082.522.20.003
 Bone joint disease16.426.50.1667.133.30.0002.531.10.001
Education level
 None1.611.80.0274.210.00.0002.413.30.005
 Elementary school25.432.415.540.014.637.8
 Middle school14.320.614.120.012.222.2
 High school27.020.626.821.426.817.8
  ≥ College31.714.739.48.643.98.9
Income (US$)
 < 100062.975.00.35755.782.90.00755.084.40.137
 1000 - 200025.817.630.011.430.08.9
 2000 - 30001.62.94.31.42.52.2
  ≥ 30009.74.410.04.312.54.4
Marital status
 Living with partner47.638.80.20852.137.70.05351.234.10.272
 Divorced or separated7.96.09.92.912.24.5
 Widowed42.949.335.255.134.154.5
 Single and never married1.60.01.40.02.40.0
Medication77.485.30.24874.688.40.03668.386.70.042
Exercise regularly84.177.90.36887.374.30.04992.775.60.076
Alcohol drinkers14.35.90.10818.35.70.02214.60.00.051
Smoking
 Current3.25.90.5792.85.70.6122.46.70.754
 Past25.429.426.824.331.731.1
 Never71.463.270.468.665.960.0
  1. Abbreviations: MNA mini nutritional assessment, QOL quality of life
  2. aMNA is divided by two categries: high (≥ 24) and low nutritional status (≤ 23.5)
  3. bQOL, assessed score using the SF-36, was categoried by percentage: high (≥ 50%) and low (< 50%) QOL
  4. cNutritional status & QOL were grouped by combinations of each category of MNA and QOL. Best, high nutritional status and high QOL; worst, low nutritional status and low QOL
  5. dP-values for differences between groups using Chi-square test for proportions and Student's t test for mean. Values in boldface are significant (p < 0.05)
  6. eValues are expressed as percentages
  7. fValues are expressed as means ± SD