Table 1

Multimorbidity Prevalence and Its Association With Different Sociodemographic Characteristics: Results From Univariate and Multivariate Analyses (N = 1,649)

CharacteristicsNo. (Weighted %)Percentage With Multimorbiditya Weighted % (95% CI)Crude Odds Ratio (95% CI)Adjusted Odds Ratio (95% CI)
Age-groupb[Reference][Reference]
 18–29 y373 (22.6)5.8 (1.99–9.6)
 30–39 y297 (18.1)22.2 (15.1–29.4)4.79 (2.73–8.39)6.10 (3.19–11.65)c
 40–49 y346 (20.5)24.3 (17.7–30.9)6.14 (3.58–10.54)8.49 (4.45–16.117)c
 50–59 y266 (16.7)36.2 (27.9–44.5)11.24 (6.54–19.29)16.41 (8.55–31.48)c
 60–69 y236 (14.6)36.9 (28.1–45.8)11.09 (6.41–19.19)16.14 (8.38–31.10)c
 ≥70 y131 (07.5)44.4 (33.0–55.8)15.01 (8.25–12.30)22.35 (11.15–44.71)c
Sexb
 Male921 (55.8)25.1 (22.1–28.0)[Reference][Reference]
 Female728 (44.2)32.5 (29.0–35.9)1.37 (1.08–1.73)1.61 (1.23–2.12)c
Place of living
 Rural1,493 (90.4)25.5 (23.2–27.8)[Reference][Reference]
 Urban156 (9.6)28.5 (27.8–29.3)1.36 (0.88–2.11)1.39 (0.86–2.27)
 Ethnicity
 Aboriginal471 (28.0)27.7 (26.3–29.2)[Reference][Reference]
 Nonaboriginal1,178 (71.4)28.5 (27.6–29.4)1.68 (1.28–2.21)1.57 (1.16–2.13)c
Socioeconomic status
 Below poverty line1,035 (61.6)28.8 (27.8–29.7)[Reference][Reference]
 Above poverty line601 (38.4)27.5 (26.2–28.8)1.34 (1.05–1.70)1.35 (1.03–1.78)c
Schooling
 No School642 (38.1)35.0 (33.7–36.3)[Reference]
 Primary completed514 (30.7)28.3 (27.1–29.5)1.22 (0.93–1.61)1.61 (1.17–2.22)c
 Secondary and above493 (31.1)20.1 (19.6–21.1)0.68 (0.50–0.91)1.53 (1.03–2.25)c
Marital status
 Currently married1,321 (79.8)29.3 (28.5–30.1)[Reference][Reference]
 Currently not married328 (20.2)24.3 (22.0–26.6)0.74 (0.55–1.01)1.45 (0.97–2.15)
Facility
 Public849 (61.0)28.1 (27.1–29.1)[Reference][Reference]
 Private800 (39.0)28.6 (27.5–29.7)1.35 (1.06–1.71)1.40 (1.08–1.81)c
 Total1,649 (100.0)28.3 (25.9–30.7)

  • ↵a Two or more conditions.

  • ↵b The prevalence of multimorbidity across age-group was adjusted for sex, and across sex was adjusted for age; for others prevalence was adjusted for age and sex.

  • ↵c We used a binary logistic regression model, with P <.05 considered to be significant.