4.5 Article

Hearing sensitivity and the risk of incident falls and fracture in older women: The study of osteoporotic fractures

Journal

ANNALS OF EPIDEMIOLOGY
Volume 14, Issue 5, Pages 311-318

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.annepidem.2003.09.008

Keywords

accidental falls; bone density; epidemiology; hearing; hearing loss; osteoporosis; presbycusis

Funding

  1. NIAMS NIH HHS [AR35582, AR35584, AR35583] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIA NIH HHS [AG05407, AG05394] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

PURPOSE: To determine if age-related hearing loss may be related to bone health. Decreased vestibular function has been associated with hearing loss, and osteoporosis may be a cause of such demineralization. We hypothesized that hearing loss would be related to an increased risk of falling and osteoporotic fracture in 6480 women aged 65 years or older enrolled in the Study of Osteoporotic Fractures. We further hypothesized that decreased bone mineral density would be associated with hearing loss. METHODS: Hearing sensitivity was ascertained via screening audiometry, and was classified as normal, mild loss, or significant loss. Incident non-spine fractures and falls were ascertained every 4 months for an average 6.7 years and 3 years, respectively. RESULTS: The age-adjusted annual fall rate did not differ significantly by hearing category, nor did the risk of incident fracture. Adjustment for confounding factors had no effect on our results. Age- and BMI-adjusted mean calcaneal bone mineral density (g/cm(2)) was 0.380 in the normal hearing group, 0.375 in the mild loss group, and 0.371 in the significant loss group (p = 0.02). There were no significant differences in total hip bone mineral density across hearing categories. CONCLUSIONS: Our results do not support the hypothesis that hearing loss is a risk factor for fracture or falls. (C) 2004 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available