Next Article in Journal
A Fatty Diet Induces a Jejunal Ketogenesis Which Inhibits Local SGLT1-Based Glucose Transport via an Acetylation Mechanism—Results from a Randomized Cross-Over Study between Iso-Caloric High-Fat versus High-Carbohydrate Diets in Healthy Volunteers
Next Article in Special Issue
Adherence to Lifestyle Recommendations for Bone Health in Older Adults with and without Osteoporosis: Cross-Sectional Results of the OUTDOOR ACTIVE Study
Previous Article in Journal
Comparison of the 24 h Dietary Recall of Two Consecutive Days, Two Non-Consecutive Days, Three Consecutive Days, and Three Non-Consecutive Days for Estimating Dietary Intake of Chinese Adult
Previous Article in Special Issue
Nutrition Risk, Resilience and Effects of a Brief Education Intervention among Community-Dwelling Older Adults during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Alberta, Canada
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Nutrients
Volume 14
Issue 9
10.3390/nu14091963
nutrients-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Behavioral Health Risk Factors and Motivation to Change among Cardiovascular General Hospital Patients Aged 50 to 79 Years

by
Ulrike Siewert-Markus
1,2,*,
Sabina Ulbricht
2,3,
Beate Gaertner
4,
Birgit-Christiane Zyriax
5,6,
Marcus Dörr
2,7,
Stefanie Tobschall
1,
Sophie Baumann
2,8,
Ulrich John
2,3 and
Jennis Freyer-Adam
1,2
1
Institute for Medical Psychology, University Medicine Greifswald, 17475 Greifswald, Germany
2
German Centre for Cardiovascular Research (DZHK), Partner Site Greifswald, 17475 Greifswald, Germany
3
Department of Prevention Research and Social Medicine, Institute for Community Medicine, University Medicine Greifswald, 17475 Greifswald, Germany
4
Robert-Koch-Institute, 13353 Berlin, Germany
5
Preventive Medicine and Nutrition, Institute for Health Service Research in Dermatology and Nursing (IVDP), University Hospital Hamburg-Eppendorf, 20246 Hamburg, Germany
6
German Centre for Cardiovascular Research (DZHK), Partner Site Hamburg, 20251 Hamburg, Germany
7
Department of Internal Medicine B, University Medicine Greifswald, 17475 Greifswald, Germany
8
Section Methods in Community Medicine, Institute for Community Medicine, University Medicine Greifswald, 17475 Greifswald, Germany
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Nutrients 2022, 14(9), 1963; https://doi.org/10.3390/nu14091963
Submission received: 9 April 2022 / Revised: 2 May 2022 / Accepted: 5 May 2022 / Published: 7 May 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Dietary and Lifestyle-Related Behaviours in Community-Dwelling Older Adults)
Browse Figure
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Little is known about the (co-)occurrence of smoking, alcohol at-risk drinking, physical inactivity and overweight, and the motivation to change these behavioral health risk factors (HRFs) in older general hospital patients with cardiovascular disease. Between October and December 2016, all consecutively admitted patients aged 50 to 79 years were proactively recruited on 3 cardiology wards and asked to participate in a survey on HRFs and behavior change motivation. Of the eligible patients, 80.4% participated in the survey (n = 328). The mean age was 66.5 years (standard deviation 9.0), and 65.5% were male. At least 1 HRF was present in 91.8% (n = 280), at least 2 HRFs in 54.4% (n = 166), and 3 or 4 HRFs in 12.1% (n = 37) of participants. The proportion of older adults who contemplated or were changing or planning to change their behavior to meet health behavior recommendations ranged between 66.0% (smoking) and 93.2% (alcohol consumption). The results indicate a notable co-occurrence of behavioral HRFs in older patients with cardiovascular disease. The majority of older adults were at least considering changing the respective behavior. To prevent and treat diseases efficiently, hospitalization may be a suitable moment for systematic multiple HRF screening and intervention.

1. Introduction

With the demographic aging of the population and an increasing life expectancy [1], maintaining health, physical and cognitive functioning, and independence in late life is an important public health goal [2]. In older age, most of the disease burden is due to non-communicable diseases, in particular cardiovascular disease. The 4 modifiable behavioral health risk factors (HRFs) of smoking, alcohol at-risk drinking, physical inactivity, and overweight are major contributors to the development of non-communicable diseases and to all-cause mortality [3]. A smaller number of HRFs are associated with lower morbidity rates [4,5,6], a lower mortality risk [7,8,9,10], in particular a lower cardiovascular disease incidence and mortality [7,10,11], better self-rated health [12], a slower rate of functional decline and better recovery from functional impairment and a delayed onset of disability [13,14,15,16,17], and a slower rate of cognitive decline and lower dementia risk [18,19,20]. Further, it has been found that nutritional status is related to the prognosis and length of hospital stay in patients with acute coronary syndrome or heart failure [21,22].
A general population study found that of the aforementioned 4 behavioral HRFs, 2 or more were present in 53.4% of European adults aged 50 years or over. The combination of overweight and physical inactivity had the highest prevalence of 35.4% [23]. A recent study, based on a large representative German general population sample, showed that the risk of having 2 or more, i.e., multiple, HRFs and of being overweight and/or physically inactive increased with age [24]. Only a few studies investigated multiple HRFs in older adults, and the findings are rather inconsistent concerning (a) which HRFs cluster or co-occur and (b) whether older adults tend to have a smaller or higher number of HRFs compared to younger adults [25,26].
It is expected that individual and co-occurring behavioral HRFs are more common among older general hospital patients with cardiovascular disease than in the general population of the same age as the HRFs may have contributed to hospital admission [27,28,29,30]. However, this representative data is lacking.
To address behavioral HRFs, the general hospital has been found to be particularly suitable [31]. Hospitalization itself may be a health event that might motivate individuals to change unhealthy behaviors [32,33]. However, little is known about the motivation for behavioral changes among older adults in general and in particular among those with cardiovascular disease. A study in acute coronary syndrome patients showed that their behavioral HRFs greatly decreased 6 months after the beginning of inpatient cardiac rehabilitation while no further changes were detected after 1 year. Moreover, patients with multiple HRFs were less likely to maintain a healthier lifestyle over time [34].
This study had 3 aims: (1) to determine the occurrence and co-occurrence of 4 behavioral HRFs in older general hospital patients with cardiovascular disease; (2) to identify the association of sex, age, and school education with HRF number; and (3) to investigate the stages of change regarding recommended health behaviors in case of the presence of the respective HRF.

2. Materials and Methods

Data were obtained in a cross-sectional electronic survey on behavioral HRFs among general hospital patients with cardiovascular disease, which was approved by the Ethics Committee of the University Medicine Greifswald (BB 148/15, BB 067/16).

Sampling Frame and Participants

This study was conducted at the University Medicine Hospital Greifswald in northeastern Germany. During 10 weeks between 10 October and 16 December 2016, participants were recruited on 3 cardiology wards at the Department of Internal Medicine. On weekdays, all consecutively admitted patients in the predefined age range of 18 to 79 years were approached by 1 of 3 research assistants and asked to respond to survey questions regarding behavioral HRFs. Those who provided verbal informed consent for anonymous participation in the survey received an electronic handheld device and a brief introduction to the handling of the computerized self-administered questionnaire. The electronic handheld device also assessed electronic consent.
Of 617 consecutively admitted patients, 536 were in the age range 50 to 79 years considered in the present analysis. Of these, those who were cognitively or physically incapable or terminally ill or had highly contagious diseases (n = 48), were discharged or transferred outside the study area within the first 24 h (n = 37), had already been recruited for a study during an earlier hospital stay (n = 35), had insufficient language skills (n = 7), and were employed at the conducting research institute (n = 1) were excluded from survey participation. This resulted in 408 patients who were eligible to participate in the survey, and 328 patients (80.4%) took part (Figure 1).

3. Measures

3.1. Behavioral Health Risk Factors

Four behavioral HRFs were assessed, namely current smoking, alcohol at-risk drinking, physical inactivity, and overweight. Each of the 4 HRFs was coded as 1 if it was present and 0 if it was absent, which resulted in a total HRF number of 0 to 4.
Tobacco smoking (henceforth smoking) was assessed according to the question, “Do you currently smoke? Please answer the question with regard to the last 4 weeks before your hospital admission”. The response categories differentiated between daily smoking, occasional smoking, former smoking, and never smoking. Current occasional and daily smokers were considered smokers.
Alcohol at-risk drinking (henceforth alcohol) was determined using the total score of the Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test-Consumption [35]. It consists of 3 items assessing the frequency and quantity of alcohol drinking and the frequency of heavy episodic alcohol drinking. According to Higgins-Biddle and Babor (2018), a gender-specific version for heavy episodic drinking was used: women/men were asked how often they had 4/5 or more alcoholic drinks on 1 occasion [36]. The total score ranged from 0 to 12. Alcohol at-risk drinking was considered present for women/men with a score of ≥4/5 [37]. These cut-offs correspond well with the national limits defined for healthy adults, i.e., >12/24 g of pure alcohol per day and >3/4 drinks per occasion for women/men [38,39]. There are no recommendations specific to older adults. Persons with acquired diseases, including cardiovascular disease, and persons taking medication should reduce their alcohol consumption [39,40].
Physical inactivity (henceforth inactivity) was assessed according to the International Physical Activity Questionnaire-Short Form [41], which assesses aerobic physical activity in the last 7 days. Due to the fact that patients were hospitalized when they were interviewed, the timeline was adapted in this study and referred to a typical week to account for illness-related physical activity restrictions before the hospital stay. In order to determine physical inactivity, the total amount of minutes per week of moderate and vigorous physical activity was calculated. Those with ≥150 min per week of moderate activity, ≥75 min per week of vigorous activity, or an equivalent amount of both were subsumed to be sufficiently physically active in accordance with the recommendations of the World Health Organization (WHO) for both adults and older adults [42], which largely agree with recommendations specifically tailored to older adults [43,44]. Those who did not reach this level of activity were referred to as physically inactive.
Overweight or obesity (henceforth overweight) was assessed based on the body mass index (BMI) obtained from participants’ self-reported weight and height. BMI is defined as body weight in kilograms, divided by body height in square meters. BMI ≥ 25.0 was defined as overweight or obesity [45]. This definition is based on the WHO recommendations for adults due to the lack of specific recommendations for older adults.

3.2. Motivation to Change Behavioral Health Risk Factors

If a certain behavioral HRF was present, the stage of change according to the Transtheoretical Model of Intentional Behavior Change (TTM) was assessed for smoking cessation, alcohol low-risk drinking, sufficient physical activity, and a healthy diet, respectively. According to TTM, persons proceed through stages of change; from not thinking about change (pre-contemplation), through being ambivalent about change (contemplation), planning to change (preparation), and manifesting change (action) to maintaining achieved change (maintenance) [46]. For each relevant health behavior, an adapted 4-item measure was used [47,48]. It allocates individuals to (1) action, i.e., participants who reported a lasting attempt to adhere to the respective recommendation within the past 6 months. Thus, the action stage included participants who, despite their efforts to reduce or increase the respective behavior, still did not meet the recommendations. The action stage was not assessed among smokers as persons in action would have reported current non-smoking, and the stage of change was not assessed in current non-smokers. All others were allocated to: (2) pre-contemplation, i.e., participants who did not intend to permanently adhere to the respective health behavior recommendation; (3) contemplation, i.e., participants who considered permanently adhering to the recommendation; and (4) preparation, i.e., participants who seriously planned to permanently adhere to the recommendation.

4. Other Measures

Since BMI is a simplified measure and indicator of an unhealthy diet, compliance with the recommendations of a Mediterranean diet, namely high consumption of vegetables, fruits, fish, nuts, legumes, and olive or rapeseed oil, and low consumption of meat, meat products, sweets, and sweetened beverages, was assessed with questions adapted from the Mediterranean Diet Adherence Screener [49], as shown in Supplementary Table S1.
Self-rated health was assessed using the single item “How would you describe your health in general?”, and the response categories (1) “excellent”, (2) “very good”, (3) “good”, (4) “fair”, and (5) “poor”. For the analysis, the responses were dichotomized in lower self-rated health (4 to 5) versus better self-rated health (1 to 3).
Sociodemographic characteristics included self-reported sex, age in years, and highest school education. Age was collapsed into the 3 age groups of 50 to 59, 60 to 69, and 70 to 79 years. Two levels of school education achievement were distinguished: a lower level (school leaving certificate after 10th grade or earlier) and higher level (school leaving certificate after 11th grade or later).

Statistical Analysis

Proportions and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) are given. Proportions for the 4 single behavioral HRFs and for 1 or more HRF, 2 or more (multiple) HRFs, and 3 or 4 HRFs are presented in total and stratified by sociodemographic characteristics. Proportions of 0 HRFs and 15 HRF patterns, i.e., specific combinations of HRFs, are presented for the total sample. To investigate variables associated with HRF number (range 0 to 4), a multivariable ordered logistic regression analysis with sex, age in years, and school education as predictors was calculated. Furthermore, the proportions and CIs of the 4 stages of change for each health behavior are presented. Finally, additional analyses tested the compliance with the recommendations of a Mediterranean diet of non-overweight and overweight/obese participants. p-values < 0.05 and non-overlapping CIs were considered statistically significant. STATA version 14.2 SE was used. Cases with missing values were excluded list-wise.

5. Results

5.1. Sample Characteristics

Overall, participants were, on average, 66.5 years old (n = 328; standard deviation, SD = 9.0, median = 67.0), 65.5% were men, 70.4% had a lower level of school education, and 61.9% reported better self-rated health. In the total sample, the mean HRF number was 1.6 (SD = 0.8, median = 2.0; Table 1).

5.2. Occurrence and Co-Occurrence of Behavioral Health Risk Factors

Overweight was the most common HRF (75.9%, n = 249), followed by inactivity (49.5%, n = 153), alcohol (19.0%, n = 59), and smoking (16.1%, n = 50; Table 2). The HRF alcohol was more common in men (24.0%, 95% CI 18.6 to 30.4, n = 49) than in women (9.3%, 95% CI 5.0 to 16.7, n = 10), and in 50- to 59-year-old participants (31.0%, 95% CI 22.1 to 41.7, n = 27) compared to those aged 70 to 79 years (12.9%, 95% CI 8.1 to 19.8, n = 17). Smoking was more common in 50- to 59-year-old (29.9%, 95% CI 21.1 to 40.5, n = 26) and 60- to 69-year-old (19.6%, 95% CI 12.6 to 29.1, n = 18) participants compared to those aged 70 to 79 years (4.5%, 95% CI 2.0 to 9.8, n = 6).
In the total sample, 8.2% of the participants had no behavioral HRF (n = 25), 37.4% had 1 HRF (n = 114), 42.3% had 2 HRFs (n = 129), and 11.5% (n = 35) had 3 HRFs (Table 3). Among the 5 most common HRF patterns, 4 contained overweight: overweight alone (25.9%, n = 79), overweight plus inactivity (29.2%, n = 89), overweight plus alcohol (7.5%, n = 23), overweight plus inactivity plus smoking (4.6%, n = 14), and inactivity alone (8.5%, n = 26).

5.3. Associations of Sociodemographic Characteristics and Number of HRFs

The proportions of at least 1 HRF, 2 or more HRFs, and 3 or more HRFs by socio-demographics are shown in Table 4. The multivariable ordered logistic regression analysis revealed that the number of HRFs was inversely associated with age (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.95 to 0.996, p = 0.02) and school education (OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.97, p = 0.04, reference: lower school education).

5.4. Motivation to Change Regarding Recommended Health Behaviors

As depicted in more detail in Table 5, 81.6% (n = 199) of the participants who were overweight contemplated or planned or were attempting to follow a healthier diet. Of the participants who were inactive, 84.9% (n = 129) and 93.2% (n = 55) of the participants with at-risk alcohol consumption contemplated or planned or were attempting to change their behavior to meet respective recommendations. Of the participants who were current smokers, 66.0% (n = 33) were at least considering or planning to quit smoking.
Considering the most common combination of 2 HRFs, i.e., overweight and inactivity, 49.4% (95% CI 39.0 to 59.9; n = 44) of the participants were in the same stage of change for the respective health behavior recommendations, 18.0% (95% CI 11.2 to 27.6; n = 16) were in a higher stage for healthy diet recommendations, and 32.6% (95% CI 23.5 to 43.2; n = 29) were in a higher stage for physical activity recommendations.

5.5. Additional Analyses of Dietary Habits

Supplementary Table S1 presents a more detailed description of the dietary habits, beyond the BMI categories, which served as a simplified indicator of an unhealthy diet. Information is provided regarding the food categories of the Mediterranean diet for the total sample and separately for non-overweight and overweight participants. In the total sample, non-adherence to different food recommendations ranged between 40.9% (limiting intake of sweets) and 99.4% (sufficient intake of olive or rapeseed oil). Independent of weight status, adherence to the Mediterranean diet recommendations was low.

6. Discussion

Three main findings indicate a high need for multiple HRF screening and intervention in general hospital patients aged 50 to 79 years with cardiovascular disease. Firstly, 54% of all patients reported multiple behavioral HRFs, with younger and less educated patients reporting a higher number of HRFs. Secondly, among the 5 most common HRF patterns, 4 contained overweight and 3 inactivity, as single HRFs or in combination with other HRFs. Thirdly, 66% and more of the participants with the respective HRFs were at least considering, planning, or attempting to change the respective HRF.
The findings concerning the high co-occurrence of multiple HRFs among 50- to 79-year-old general hospital patients with cardiovascular disease are in line with findings in the 50-year-old or older general population showing that 2 or more HRFs were present in more than 50% of the population [23,24]. Further, around 90% of both our cardiologic patients and the general population in this age range had at least 1 HRF [23,24]. These findings were confirmed by a recent study in the general German population aged 45 years and over, in which over 90% of the participants confirmed at least 1 of 5 HRFs [50].
Moreover, in line with general population studies, we found a higher number of HRFs in less educated participants compared to higher educated participants [24,25,26,51]. In addition, younger age was associated with a higher number of HRFs. This contradicts general adult population studies, which found a higher risk of having 1 or more HRFs with increasing age [24,50]. However, the findings concerning age are rather inconsistent [25,26]. We did not find a higher number of HRFs in men compared to women as shown in previous general population studies [24,25,26,51]. However, due to our comparatively small sample size, this result should be interpreted with caution. Discrepancies in how many and which HRFs were considered and how they were assessed and defined hinder a comparison of results, and different study populations were also used [24,25].
Regarding single health behaviors, the occurrence of behavioral HRFs in older general hospital patients with cardiovascular disease was similar to the HRF occurrence in the general population [51]. The present study showed that at 75%, obesity was by far the most common HRF, followed by physical inactivity at 50%. In comparison, a study on European adults aged 50 years or older showed a lower occurrence of overweight (60%) and a higher occurrence of physical inactivity (71%). With regard to smoking, the occurrence was comparable between the 2 studies (16% versus 18%). With regard to risky alcohol consumption, the occurrence in the present study was significantly higher (19% versus 4% [51]).
In line with previous findings, the most common pattern of HRFs in older patients was overweight and inactivity (29% versus 35% in [23]). Findings in patients with coronary heart disease also revealed a high co-occurrence of overweight and inactivity [52]. While overweight (26% versus 13%) and inactivity (9% versus 22% in [23]) as single HRFs accounted for the second and third most common HRF patterns in our study, overweight plus alcohol at-risk drinking (8% versus 1% [23]) and overweight plus inactivity plus smoking (circa 5% in both studies) were the fourth and fifth most common HRF patterns, respectively. Reasons for reduced physical activity and increased overweight in older age groups could include bodily complaints, lack of training, changes in body composition, and a more sedentary lifestyle compared to younger people. Reduced smoking and alcohol at-risk drinking could be due to quitting smoking and alcohol consumption when facing ill health and also due to selective mortality as a result of smoking and alcohol consumption and related health disturbances [24]. Overall, the HRFs overweight and alcohol at-risk drinking were more common in the patient sample.
Our study provides a first insight into the motivation underlying behavior change in older individuals with cardiovascular disease. With 66% of those who smoked and more than 80% of those who were alcohol at-risk drinkers, inactive, or overweight contemplating or planning to change, or changing their behavior to meet respective recommendations, motivation to change was high. A study of recently discharged 17- to 96-year-old general hospital patients reported a higher proportion of participants who were at least considering to change their behavior for smoking (80%), lower respective proportions for alcohol at-risk drinking (52%) and physical inactivity (61%), and a comparable proportion for overweight (86%) [53]. These differences could be due to a wider age range and a lower participation rate (59% versus 79% in our study), which may have resulted in the recruitment of particularly motivated patients in Haynes (2008). With regards to the higher motivation to change at-risk alcohol use and to adhere to physical activity recommendations, our algorithm may have overestimated the proportion of participants in the action stage, as the participants were first assigned to action, and only those participants who did not report a lasting attempt regarding behavior change were allocated to the earlier motivational stages. As these participants still had the corresponding HRF, they may not have been aware of this.
Showing a high (co-)occurrence of behavioral HRFs among older general hospital patients with cardiovascular disease and a low fulfillment of nutritional recommendations, our findings support previous findings suggesting that diagnosis and routine care alone may not be sufficient in helping patients change their lifestyle accordingly. Dietary changes are especially challenging because dietary recommendations are generally complex, hard to recall, and could lead to confusion and suboptimal diet change [54]. Educating patients on diet prophylaxis is of great importance as nutritional status is related to the prognosis and length of hospitalization of cardiovascular disease patients [21,22]. Professional counseling is especially important to prevent muscle mass loss and frailty [55]. A multiple-HRF intervention approach may be central to reverse or delay declines in physical and cognitive functioning in older adults [2]. Tailored to each person’s current stage of change, a multiple-HRF intervention might lead to more effective health promotion than interventions focusing on single-behavior change [56,57]. A study on community-dwelling individuals aged 65 years or older in primary care showed that health risk assessment combined with computer-generated feedback reports and counselling was promising in terms of improved health behaviors and prolonged survival [58]. Within a randomized controlled trial, a multiple-HRF intervention approach improved or maintained cognitive functioning in at-risk people aged 60 to 77 years from the general population [59]. Within the multiple-HRF intervention, dietary improvement due to dietary counselling was associated with beneficial changes in executive function [60].

7. Strengths

The strengths of this study include, firstly, the high proportion of eligible patients who participated in the study (79%), thus minimizing the risk of selection bias. Secondly, this study investigated not only the occurrence of single HRFs but also the co-occurrence of 4 behavioral HRFs known to be major contributors to the development and maintenance of non-communicable diseases, such as cardiovascular disease, in patients. Thirdly, this study reveals first insights into the stages of behavioral change motivation of older general hospital patients with regard to recommended health behaviors.

8. Limitations

Several limitations of this study need to be considered. Firstly, the sample size was small for testing subgroup differences and associations. Distinct differences in the specific HRF patterns were shown in previous general population studies, between women and men, age groups, and different levels of education [24,25], which could only be partly analyzed in the present study. However, further consideration of these differences in older populations and specifically in older general hospital patients should be the subject of future research. Secondly, the occurrence of HRFs may be underestimated as the health behavior recommendations may not apply in detail to older individuals. For example, we might have underestimated the HRF alcohol at-risk drinking in our sample because the national recommendation for alcohol consumption only applies to healthy individuals [39]. Certain diseases or medication intake, which are found more often in older individuals, might contradict alcohol consumption at all. In addition, due to age changes in body composition, including higher fat mass and lower muscle mass proportions, alcohol is metabolized slower and alcohol consumption should generally be reduced by older individuals. We may also have underestimated physical inactivity due to socially desirable self-reported answers. Over-reporting of physical activity is a common problem, even with validated instruments [61]. Further, self-reported statements, as used in our study, are likely to underestimate overweight [62]. Nevertheless, for behavioral HRFs, self-report remains the most widespread and feasible method of assessment [63]. Thirdly, in our study, both overweight and non-overweight participants reported a high non-adherence to the recommendations of the Mediterranean diet [49], showing that overweight as a proxy variable for an unhealthy diet might be an oversimplified and insufficient measurement. Fourthly, the generalizability of our findings to patients from other departments or to internal medicine departments of other general hospitals in Germany or other countries may be limited. Fifthly, this study did not consider the patients’ medical conditions, which could be related to whether patients adhere to a healthy lifestyle and the stage of behavioral change motivation they are in. In addition, although HRF occurrence was studied interdependently, how the stages of change coincided or diverged when multiple HRFs co-occurred was not determined.

9. Conclusions

With multiple behavioral HRFs being present in 54% of the patients, our study demonstrated a high need for systematic multiple-HRF screening and intervention in older hospital patients with cardiovascular disease. The overall occurrence and co-occurrence of behavioral HRFs was high, particularly in younger and less educated patients. Despite the high occurrence of HRFs found, their occurrence may still be underestimated as it was determined based on the health behavior recommendations for healthy people.

10. Clinical Implications

Although the HRFs smoking and alcohol at-risk drinking were found to be less frequent in older age groups, they were still not negligible. The energy-balance-related HRFs overweight, inactivity, and nutrition should be the special focus of treatment and preventive efforts. Particularly, low compliance with healthy diet recommendations suggests a high demand for nutritional advice. The implementation of systematic proactive multiple-HRF screening and intervention in routine hospital care could reach all patients who are, despite their age, largely motivated to change behavioral HRFs. It may serve secondary prevention purposes by improving treatment success in patients as, at this point, health care still lacks systematic preventive measures that are accessible to all patients. Consequently, significant potential to improve individual prognosis is still being missed.
List of abbreviations: CI: confidence interval; HRF: health risk factor; M: mean: SD: standard deviation.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at: https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/nu14091963/s1, Table S1: Average consumption of food components and non-adherence to dietary recommendations according to the Mediterranean Diet Adherence Screener (Martinez-Gonzalez, Garcia-Arellano et al. 2012) in the total sample, and stratified by non-overweight (BMI < 25) and overweight (BMI ≥ 25). Reference [49] is cited in the supplementary materials.

Author Contributions

U.S.-M. performed data analyses and drafted the manuscript. J.F.-A., S.U. and U.J. designed the study. J.F.-A., S.T. and M.D. were involved in acquisition and preparation of data. B.G., B.-C.Z., S.B. and all other authors were involved in interpretation of data and in revising the article critically for important intellectual content. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research as part of the German Centre for Cardiovascular Research, DZHK (grant no. 81/Z540100152, 81/X2710126), by the German Cancer Aid (70113382), and by the Ministry of Social Affairs, Integration, and Gender Equality of Mecklenburg-West Pomerania. We acknowledge support for the Article Processing Charge by the German Research Foundation and the Open Access Publication Fund of the University of Greifswald.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Ethics Committee of the University Medicine Greifswald (BB 148/15, BB 067/16).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

On reasonable request, the data that support the findings of this study can be viewed and evaluated with the responsible researchers on site. To comply with the statement given in the informed consent procedure, the data cannot be passed on to third parties or uploaded for public access.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the patients who participated in the survey. We are grateful to study staff for assistance with data collection and to Christian Goeze for programming the assessment software.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interest.

References

  1. Lutz, W.; Sanderson, W.; Scherbov, S. The coming acceleration of global population ageing. Nature 2008, 451, 716–719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. World Health Organization. World Report on Ageing and Health. 2015. Available online: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/186463/9789240694811_eng.pdf;jsessionid=07ABF9577D09C40B02EEFF70B6A6A227?sequence=1 (accessed on 4 January 2022).
  3. GBD Risk Factor Collaborators. Global, regional, and national comparative risk assessment of 84 behavioural, environmental and occupational, and metabolic risks or clusters of risks for 195 countries and territories, 1990–2017: A systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet 2018, 392, 1923–1994. [Google Scholar]
  4. Yusuf, S.; Hawken, S.; Ôunpuu, S.; Dans, T.; Avezum, A.; Lanas, F.; McQueen, M.; Budaj, A.; Pais, P.; Varigos, J.; et al. Effect of potentially modifiable risk factors associated with myocardial infarction in 52 countries (the INTERHEART study): Case-control study. Lancet 2004, 364, 937–952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Mozaffarian, D.; Kamineni, A.; Carnethon, M.; Djousse, L.; Mukamal, K.J.; Siscovick, D. Lifestyle risk factors and new-onset diabetes mellitus in older adults: The cardiovascular health study. Arch. Int. Med. 2009, 69, 798–807. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  6. Ford, E.S.; Bergmann, M.M.; Kroger, J.; Schienkiewitz, A.; Weikert, C.; Boeing, H. Healthy living is the best revenge: Findings from the European Prospective Investigation Into Cancer and Nutrition-Potsdam study. Arch. Int. Med. 2009, 69, 1355–1362. [Google Scholar]
  7. Khaw, K.T.; Wareham, N.; Bingham, S.; Welch, A.; Luben, R.; Day, N. Combined impact of health behaviours and mortality in men and women: The EPIC-Norfolk prospective population study. PLoS Med. 2008, 5, e12. [Google Scholar]
  8. Loef, M.; Walach, H. The combined effects of healthy lifestyle behaviors on all cause mortality: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Prev. Med. 2012, 55, 163–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Manuel, D.G.; Perez, R.; Sanmartin, C.; Taljaard, M.; Hennessy, D.; Wilson, K.; Tanuseputro, P.; Manson, H.; Bennett, C.; Tuna, M.; et al. Measuring Burden of Unhealthy Behaviours Using a Multivariable Predictive Approach: Life Expectancy Lost in Canada Attributable to Smoking, Alcohol, Physical Inactivity, and Diet. PLoS Med. 2016, 13, e1002082. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Petersen, K.E.N.; Johnsen, N.F.; Olsen, A.; Albieri, V.; Olsen, L.K.H.; Dragsted, L.O.; Overvad, K.; Tjønneland, A.; Egeberg, R. The combined impact of adherence to five lifestyle factors on all-cause, cancer and cardiovascular mortality: A prospective cohort study among Danish men and women. Br. J. Nutr. 2015, 113, 849–858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Zhang, Y.B.; Pan, X.F.; Chen, J.; Cao, A.; Xia, L.; Zhang, Y.; Wang, J.; Li, H.; Liu, G.; Pan, A. Combined lifestyle factors, all-cause mortality and cardiovascular disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies. J. Epidemiol. Commun. Health 2021, 75, 92–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Conry, M.C.; Morgan, K.; Curry, P.; McGee, H.; Harrington, J.; Ward, M.; Shelley, E. The clustering of health behaviours in Ireland and their relationship with mental health, self-rated health and quality of life. BMC Public Health 2011, 11, 692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Hubert, H.B.; Bloch, D.A.; Oehlert, J.W.; Fries, J.F. Lifestyle Habits and Compression of Morbidity. J. Gerontol. Ser. A 2002, 57, M347–M351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Yates, L.B.; Djoussé, L.; Kurth, T.; Buring, J.E.; Gaziano, J.M. Exceptional Longevity in Men: Modifiable Factors Associated with Survival and Function to Age 90 Years. Obstet. Gynecol. Surv. 2008, 64, 28–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Vita, A.J.; Terry, R.B.; Hubert, H.B.; Fries, J.F. Aging, health risks, and cumulative disability. N. Engl. J. Med. 1998, 338, 1035–1041. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  16. Lee, Y.; Park, K.H. Health practices that predict recovery from functional limitations in older adults. Am. J. Prev. Med. 2006, 31, 25–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Robinson, S.M.; Jameson, K.A.; Syddall, H.E.; Dennison, E.M.; Cooper, C.; Sayer, A.A. Hertfordshire Cohort Study Group; The Hertfordshire Cohort Study Group Clustering of lifestyle risk factors and poor physical function in older adults: The Hertfordshire cohort study. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 2013, 61, 1684–1691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  18. Beydoun, M.A.; Beydoun, H.A.; Gamaldo, A.A.; Teel, A.; Zonderman, A.B.; Wang, Y. Epidemiologic studies of modifiable factors associated with cognition and dementia: Systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Public Health 2014, 14, 643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Lee, Y.; Back, J.H.; Kim, J.; Kim, S.-H.; Na, D.L.; Cheong, H.-K.; Hong, C.H.; Kim, Y.G. Systematic review of health behavioral risks and cognitive health in older adults. Int. Psychogeriatr. 2010, 22, 174–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Elwood, P.; Galante, J.; Pickering, J.; Palmer, S.; Bayer, A.; Ben-Shlomo, Y.; Longley, M.; Gallacher, J. Healthy Lifestyles Reduce the Incidence of Chronic Diseases and Dementia: Evidence from the Caerphilly Cohort Study. PLoS ONE 2013, 8, e81877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Czapla, M.; Karniej, P.; Juárez-Vela, R.; Łokieć, K. The Association between Nutritional Status and In-Hospital Mortality among Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome—A Result of the Retrospective Nutritional Status Heart Study (NSHS). Nutrients 2020, 12, 3091. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Kałużna-Oleksy, M.; Krysztofiak, H.; Migaj, J.; Wleklik, M.; Dudek, M.; Uchmanowicz, I.; Lesiak, M.; Straburzyńska-Migaj, E. Relationship between Nutritional Status and Clinical and Biochemical Parameters in Hospitalized Patients with Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction, with 1-Year Follow-Up. Nutrients 2020, 12, 2330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Linardakis, M.; Papadaki, A.; Smpokos, E.; Komninos, Y.; Philalithis, A. Multiple behavioral risk factors for chronic diseases in adults aged 50+: Regional differences across eleven European countries. J. Public Health 2013, 22, 101–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. John, U.; Hanke, M.; Freyer-Adam, J. Health Risk Behavior Patterns in a National Adult Population Survey. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2018, 15, 873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. Noble, N.; Paul, C.; Turon, H.; Oldmeadow, C. Which modifiable health risk behaviours are related? A systematic review of the clustering of Smoking, Nutrition, Alcohol and Physical activity (‘SNAP’) health risk factors. Prev. Med. 2015, 81, 16–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Meader, N.; King, K.; Moe-Byrne, T.; Wright, K.; Graham, H.; Petticrew, M.; Power, C.; White, M.; Sowden, A.J. A systematic review on the clustering and co-occurrence of multiple risk behaviours. BMC Public Health 2016, 16, 657. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  27. Saß, A.; Wurm, S.; Ziese, T. Age = Illness? Health condition and health development. In Beiträge zur Gesundheitsberichterstattung des Bundes: Gesundheit und Krankheit im Alter; Robert Koch-Institute: Berlin, Germany, 2009; pp. 31–61. [Google Scholar]
  28. Haveman-Nies, A.; de Groot, L.; Burema, J.; Cruz, J.A.A.; Osler, M.; Van Staveren, W.A. Dietary Quality and Lifestyle Factors in Relation to 10-Year Mortality in Older Europeans: The SENECA Study. Am. J. Epidemiol. 2002, 156, 962–968. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Tran, B.; Falster, M.O.; Douglas, K.; Blyth, F.; Jorm, L.R. Health Behaviours and Potentially Preventable Hospitalisation: A Prospective Study of Older Australian Adults. PLoS ONE 2014, 9, e93111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  30. Syddall, H.E.; Westbury, L.D.; Simmonds, S.J.; Robinson, S.; Cooper, C.; Sayer, A.A. Understanding poor health behaviours as predictors of different types of hospital admission in older people: Findings from the Hertfordshire Cohort Study. J. Epidemiol. Commun. Health 2016, 70, 292–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Freyer-Adam, J.; Noetzel, F.; Baumann, S.; Aghdassi, A.A.; Siewert-Markus, U.; Gaertner, B.; John, U. Behavioral health risk factor profiles in general hospital patients: Identifying the need for screening and brief intervention. BMC Public Health 2019, 19, 1594. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  32. McBride, C.M.; Emmons, K.M.; Lipkus, I.M. Understanding the potential of teachable moments: The case of smoking cessation. Health Educ. Res. 2003, 18, 156–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Longabaugh, R.; Minugh, P.A.; Nirenberg, T.D.; Clifford, P.R.; Becker, B.; Woolard, R. Injury as a motivator to reduce drinking. Acad. Emerg. Med. 1995, 2, 817–825. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Steca, P.; Monzani, D.; Greco, A.; Franzelli, C.; Magrin, M.E.; Miglioretti, M.; Sarini, M.; Scrignaro, M.; Vecchio, L.; Fattirolli, F.; et al. Stability and change of lifestyle profiles in cardiovascular patients after their first acute coronary event. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0183905. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  35. Bush, K.; Kivlahan, D.R.; McDonell, M.B.; Fihn, S.D.; Bradley, K.A. The AUDIT Alcohol Consumption Questions (AUDIT-C). An Effective Brief Screening Test for Problem Drinking. Arch. Intern. Med. 1998, 158, 1789–1795. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  36. Higgins-Biddle, J.C.; Babor, T.F. A review of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT), AUDIT-C, and USAUDIT for screening in the United States: Past issues and future directions. Am. J. Drug Alcohol Abus. 2018, 44, 578–586. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Reinert, D.F.; Allen, J.P. The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test: An Update of Research Findings. Alcohol. Clin. Exp. Res. 2007, 31, 185–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. Drinking Levels Defined. 2012. Available online: https://www.niaaa.nih.gov/alcohol-health/overview-alcohol-consumption/moderate-binge-drinking (accessed on 4 January 2022).
  39. Seitz, H.K.; Bühringer, G.; Mann, K. Grenzwerte für den Konsum alkoholischer Getränke: Empfehlungen des wissenschaftlichen Kuratoriums der DHS. In Jahrbuch Sucht; Neuland: Geesthacht, Germany, 2008; pp. 205–209. [Google Scholar]
  40. Deutsche Hauptstelle fur Suchtfragen. Wie Sollten Menschen mit Alkohol Umgehen, um Gesundheitsrisiken zu Verringern? Stellungnahme der Deutschen Hauptstelle für Suchtfragen e.V. 2019. Available online: https://www.dhs.de/fileadmin/user_upload/pdf/dhs-stellungnahmen/DHS_Stellungnahme_Umgang_mit_Alkohol.pdf (accessed on 4 January 2022).
  41. Booth, M.L. Short Last 7 Days Self-Administered Version of the IPAQ. 2002. Available online: http://youthrex.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/IPAQ-TM.pdf (accessed on 4 January 2022).
  42. World Health Organization. Guidelines on Physical Activity and Sedentary Behaviour. 2020. Available online: https://apps.who.int/iris/rest/bitstreams/1315866/retrieve (accessed on 8 March 2022).
  43. Haskell, W.L.; Lee, I.M.; Pate, R.R.; Powell, K.E.; Blair, S.N.; Franklin, B.A.; Macrea, C.A.; Heath, G.W.; Thompson, P.D.; Bauman, A. Physical activity and public health: Updated recommendation for adults from the American College of Sports Medicine and the American Heart Association. Circulation 2007, 116, 1081–1093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  44. Nelson, M.E.; Rejeski, W.J.; Blair, S.N.; Duncan, P.W.; Judge, J.O.; King, A.C.; Macera, C.A.; Castaneda-Sceppa, C. Physical activity and public health in older adults: Recommendation from the American College of Sports Medicine and the American Heart Association. Circulation 2007, 116, 1094–1105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  45. World Health Organization. Obesity: Preventing and Managing the Global Epidemic: Report of a WHO Consultation (WHO Technical Report Series 894; 1999). 1999. Available online: https://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/obesity/WHO_TRS_894/en/ (accessed on 4 January 2022).
  46. Prochaska, J.O.; Velicer, W.F. The Transtheoretical Model of Health Behavior Change. Am. J. Health Promot. 1997, 12, 38–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Lippke, S.; Ziegelmann, J.P.; Schwarzer, R.; Velicer, W.F. Validity of stage assessment in the adoption and maintenance of physical activity and fruit and vegetable consumption. Health Psychol. 2009, 28, 183–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  48. DiClemente, C.C.; Prochaska, J.O.; Fairhurst, S.K.; Velicer, W.F.; Velasquez, M.M.; Rossi, J.S. The process of smoking cessation: An analysis of precontemplation, contemplation, and preparation stages of change. J. Consult. Clin. Psychol. 1991, 59, 295–304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Martínez-González, M.A.; García-Arellano, A.; Toledo, E.; Salas-Salvadó, J.; Buil-Cosiales, P.; Corella, D.; Covas, M.I.; Schröder, H.; Arós, F.; Gómez-Gracia, E.; et al. A 14-Item Mediterranean Diet Assessment Tool and Obesity Indexes among High-Risk Subjects: The PREDIMED Trial. PLoS ONE 2012, 7, e43134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  50. Richter, A.; Schienkiewitz, A.; Starker, A.; Krug, A.; Domanska, O.; Kuhnert, R.; Loss, J.; Mensink, G.B.M. Health-promoting behaviour among adults in Germany—Results from GEDA 2019/2020-EHIS. J. Health Monit. 2021, 6, 26–44. [Google Scholar]
  51. Linardakis, M.; Smpokos, E.; Papadaki, A.; Komninos, I.D.; Tzanakis, N.; Philalithis, A. Prevalence of multiple behavioral risk factors for chronic diseases in adults aged 50+, from eleven European countries—The SHARE study (2004). Prev. Med. 2013, 57, 168–172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  52. Chair, S.Y.; Lee, S.F.; Lopez, V.; Ling, E.M. Risk factors of Hong Kong Chinese patients with coronary heart disease. J. Clin. Nurs. 2007, 16, 1278–1284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  53. Haynes, C.L. Health promotion services for lifestyle development within a UK hospital—Patients’ experiences and views. BMC Public Health 2008, 8, 284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  54. Doyle, B.; Fitzsimons, D.; McKeown, P.; McAloon, T. Understanding dietary decision-making in patients attending a secondary prevention clinic following myocardial infarction. J. Clin. Nurs. 2012, 21, 32–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Volkert, D.; Bollwein, J.; Diekmann, R.; Sieber, C. Die Rolle der Ernährung bei der Entstehung von Sarkopenie und Frailty. Ernähr. Umsch. 2011, 9, 486–493. [Google Scholar]
  56. Prochaska, J.J.; Spring, B.; Nigg, C.R. Multiple health behavior change research: An introduction and overview. Prev. Med. 2008, 46, 181–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  57. Schneider, S.; Huy, C.; Schuessler, M.; Diehl, K.; Schwarz, S. Optimising lifestyle interventions: Identification of health behaviour patterns by cluster analysis in a German 50+ survey. Eur. J. Public Health 2009, 19, 271–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  58. Stuck, A.E.; Moser, A.; Morf, U.; Wirz, U.; Wyser, J.; Gillmann, G.; Born, S.; Zwahlen, M.; Iliffe, S.; Harari, D.; et al. Effect of Health Risk Assessment and Counselling on Health Behaviour and Survival in Older People: A Pragmatic Randomised Trial. PLoS Med. 2015, 12, e1001889. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  59. Lehtisalo, J.; Levälahti, E.; Lindström, J.; Hänninen, T.; Paajanen, T.; Peltonen, M.; Antikainen, R.; Laatikainen, T.; Strandberg, T.; Soininen, H.; et al. Dietary changes and cognition over 2 years within a multidomain intervention trial—The Finnish Geriatric Intervention Study to Prevent Cognitive Impairment and Disability (FINGER). Alzheimer’s Dement. 2019, 15, 410–417. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  60. Ngandu, T.; Lehtisalo, J.; Solomon, A.; Levälahti, E.; Ahtiluoto, S.; Antikainen, R.; Bäckman, L.; Hänninen, T.; Jula, A.; Laatikainen, T.; et al. A 2 year multidomain intervention of diet, exercise, cognitive training, and vascular risk monitoring versus control to prevent cognitive decline in at-risk elderly people (FINGER): A randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2015, 385, 2255–2263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Prince, S.A.; Adamo, K.B.; Hamel, M.E.; Hardt, J.; Gorber, S.C.; Tremblay, M. A comparison of direct versus self-report measures for assessing physical activity in adults: A systematic review. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2008, 5, 56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  62. John, U.; Hanke, M.; Grothues, J.; Thyrian, J.R. Validity of overweight and obesity in a nation based on self-report versus measurement device data. Eur. J. Clin. Nutr. 2006, 60, 372–377. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  63. Newell, S.; Girgis, A.; Sanson-Fisher, R.; Savolainen, N.J. The accuracy of self-reported health behaviors and risk factors relating to cancer and cardiovascular disease in the general population: A critical review. Am. J. Prev. Med. 1999, 17, 211–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Nutrients 14 01963 g001 550
Figure 1. Participant flow chart.
Figure 1. Participant flow chart.
Nutrients 14 01963 g001
Table
Table 1. Sociodemographic characteristics, self-rated health, and number of behavioral health risk factors (of the four health risk factors of overweight, inactivity, alcohol, and smoking) for the total sample and stratified by sex.
Table 1. Sociodemographic characteristics, self-rated health, and number of behavioral health risk factors (of the four health risk factors of overweight, inactivity, alcohol, and smoking) for the total sample and stratified by sex.
TotalMenWomen
n (%)328215 (65.5)113 (34.5)
Age in years
M (SD)66.5 (9.0)65.9 (9.2)67.7 (8.4)
Median (IQR)67.0 (59.0–75.0)66.0 (58.0–75.0)69.0 (61.0–75.0)
School education level *
Lower, n (%)214 (70.4)144 (72.0)70 (67.3)
Higher, n (%)90 (29.6)56 (28.0)34 (32.7)
Self-rated health
Better, n (%)203 (61.9)138 (64.2)65 (57.5)
Lower, n (%)125 (38.1)77 (35.8)48 (42.5)
Number of health risk factors **
M (SD)1.6 (0.8)1.7 (0.9)1.5 (0.7)
Median (IQR)2.0 (1.0–2.0)2.0 (1.0–2.0)1.0 (1.0–2.0)
Notes: n = number, M = mean, SD = standard deviation, IQR = interquartile range. * n = 304; ** n = 305.
Table
Table 2. Individual behavioral health risk factors (regardless of whether any other health risk factors were present) in the total sample and stratified by sociodemographic characteristics (percent, 95% confidence interval).
Table 2. Individual behavioral health risk factors (regardless of whether any other health risk factors were present) in the total sample and stratified by sociodemographic characteristics (percent, 95% confidence interval).
OverweightInactivityAlcoholSmoking
n n n n
Total32875.9 (71.0–80.3)30949.5 (43.9–55.1)31119.0 (15.0–23.7)31116.1 (12.4–20.6)
Sex
Men21576.7 (70.6–81.9)20248.0 (41.2–55.0)20424.0 (18.6–30.4)20418.6 (13.8–24.6)
Women11374.3 (65.4–81.6)10752.3 (42.8–61.8)1079.3 (5.0–16.7)10711.2 (6.4–18.9)
Age (years)
50–59 9273.9 (63.8–82.0)8543.5 (33.2–54.4)8731.0 (22.1–41.7)8729.9 (21.1–40.5)
60–69 9484.0 (75.0–90.2)9152.7 (42.3–62.9)9216.3 (10.0–25.5)9219.6 (12.6–29.1)
70–79 14271.8 (63.8–78.7)13351.1 (42.6–59.6)13212.9 (8.1–19.8)1324.5 (2.0–9.8)
School education level *
Lower21480.8 (75.0–85.6)20954.5 (47.7–61.2)21415.4 (11.1–20.9)21419.2 (14.4–25.0)
Higher9066.7 (56.1–75.8)8937.1 (27.5–47.7)9027.8 (19.4–38.1)9010.0 (5.2–18.3)
Notes: n = number; * Data available for n = 304 or n = 298 (inactivity) patients.
Table
Table 3. Patterns of behavioral health risk factors in the total sample (n = 305).
Table 3. Patterns of behavioral health risk factors in the total sample (n = 305).
Pattern of Health Risk Factor(s) %95% CI
0 health risk factors8.25.6–11.9
Overweight25.921.3–31.1
Inactivity8.55.9–12.3
Alcohol1.00.3–3.0
Smoking2.00.9–4.3
1 health risk factor37.432.1–43.0
Overweight plus inactivity29.224.3–34.6
Overweight plus alcohol7.55.1–11.1
Overweight plus smoking2.61.3–5.2
Inactivity plus alcohol1.00.3–3.0
Inactivity plus smoking1.00.3–3.0
Alcohol plus smoking1.00.3–3.0
2 health risk factors42.336.8–47.9
Overweight plus inactivity plus alcohol3.62.0–6.4
Overweight plus inactivity plus smoking4.2.7–7.6
Overweight plus alcohol plus smoking2.31.1–4.8
Inactivity plus alcohol plus smoking1.00.3–3.0
3 health risk factors11.58.3–15.6
Overweight plus inactivity plus alcohol plus smoking0.70.2–2.6
Notes: n = number, CI = confidence interval.
Table
Table 4. Number of behavioral health risk factors in the total sample and stratified by sociodemographic characteristics (percent, 95% confidence interval).
Table 4. Number of behavioral health risk factors in the total sample and stratified by sociodemographic characteristics (percent, 95% confidence interval).
Behavioral Health Risk Factor(s)
n≥1≥2≥3
Total30591.8 (88.1–94.4)54.4 (48.8–60.0)12.1 (8.9–16.3)
Sex
Men19991.0 (86.1–94.2)58.3 (51.3–65.0)15.1 (10.7–20.8)
Women10693.4 (86.6–96.9)47.2 (37.7–56.8)6.6 (3.1–13.4)
Age (years)
50–59 8293.9 (85.9–97.5)57.3 (46.2–67.7)20.7 (13.2–31.1)
60–69 9191.2 (83.2–95.6)63.7 (53.2–73.1)15.4 (9.2–24.5)
70–79 13290.9 (84.6–94.8)46.2 (37.8–54.9)4.5 (2.0–9.8)
School education level
Lower20995.7 (91.9–97.8)58.4 (51.5–64.9)12.0 (8.2–17.2)
Higher8983.1 (73.7–89.7)44.9 (34.8–55.6)13.5 (7.7–22.5)
Notes: n = number.
Table
Table 5. Stages of change regarding recommended health behaviors for participants with the respective behavioral health risk factor (percent, 95% confidence interval).
Table 5. Stages of change regarding recommended health behaviors for participants with the respective behavioral health risk factor (percent, 95% confidence interval).
Health Risk Recommended BehaviorStage of Change
Factor PresentnPre-ContemplationContemplationPreparationAction
Overweight244Healthy diet18.4 (14.0–23.9)54.5 (48.2–60.7)4.5 (2.5–8.0)22.5 (17.7–28.3)
Inactivity152Sufficient physical activity15.1 (10.2–21.8)46.7 (38.8–54.7)17.1 (11.9–24.0)21.1 (15.2–28.3)
Alcohol59No or low-risk consumption6.8 (2.5–17.1)37.3 (25.7–50.6)6.8 (2.5–17.1)49.2 (36.4–62.1)
Smoking50Smoking cessation34.0 (21.9–48.6)40.0 (27.1–54.5)26.0 (15.4–40.3)/
Notes: n = number.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Siewert-Markus, U.; Ulbricht, S.; Gaertner, B.; Zyriax, B.-C.; Dörr, M.; Tobschall, S.; Baumann, S.; John, U.; Freyer-Adam, J. Behavioral Health Risk Factors and Motivation to Change among Cardiovascular General Hospital Patients Aged 50 to 79 Years. Nutrients 2022, 14, 1963. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu14091963

AMA Style

Siewert-Markus U, Ulbricht S, Gaertner B, Zyriax B-C, Dörr M, Tobschall S, Baumann S, John U, Freyer-Adam J. Behavioral Health Risk Factors and Motivation to Change among Cardiovascular General Hospital Patients Aged 50 to 79 Years. Nutrients. 2022; 14(9):1963. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu14091963

Chicago/Turabian Style

Siewert-Markus, Ulrike, Sabina Ulbricht, Beate Gaertner, Birgit-Christiane Zyriax, Marcus Dörr, Stefanie Tobschall, Sophie Baumann, Ulrich John, and Jennis Freyer-Adam. 2022. "Behavioral Health Risk Factors and Motivation to Change among Cardiovascular General Hospital Patients Aged 50 to 79 Years" Nutrients 14, no. 9: 1963. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu14091963

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop