4.6 Article

Hearing Handicap Predicts the Development of Depressive Symptoms After 3 Years in Older Community-Dwelling Japanese

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN GERIATRICS SOCIETY
Volume 58, Issue 1, Pages 93-97

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2009.02615.x

Keywords

hearing handicap; depression; aged; cohort studies

Funding

  1. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Japan [19390166]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

OBJECTIVES To examine the association between hearing handicap and depressive symptoms in older community-dwelling Japanese. DESIGN Community-based cohort study. SETTING Kurabuchi Town, Gunma Prefecture, Japan. PARTICIPANTS Five hundred eighty residents (261 men, 319 women) aged 65 and older without depressive symptoms. MEASUREMENTS In a baseline examination performed in 2005/06, participants answered the 10-item screening version of the Hearing Handicap Inventory for Elderly (HHIE-S). They were divided into two groups according to their scores: a group with no hearing handicap (HHIE-S scores of < 8) and a hearing handicap group (HHIE-S scores of >= 10). The Geriatric Depression Scale was used to identify depressive symptoms in face-to-face home visit interviews conducted in 2008, and the association between hearing handicap and depressive symptoms was assessed using logistic regression. RESULTS The incidence of depressive symptoms was 19.6% in the group with a hearing handicap and 8.0% in the group without a hearing handicap. When compared with the subjects without hearing handicap, subjects with a hearing handicap had a multiadjusted odds ratio of depressive symptoms of 2.45 (95% confidence interval=1.26-4.77). The association remained significant even when hearing impairment measured with pure-tone audiometry was added to the multiadjusted model. CONCLUSION A hearing handicap can predict future depressive symptoms in older community-dwelling people.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available