Skip header and navigation

Refine By

2 records – page 1 of 1.

Hearing as a predictor of falls and postural balance in older female twins.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature152870
Source
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2009 Feb;64(2):312-7
Publication Type
Article
Date
Feb-2009
Author
Anne Viljanen
Jaakko Kaprio
Ilmari Pyykkö
Martti Sorri
Satu Pajala
Markku Kauppinen
Markku Koskenvuo
Taina Rantanen
Author Affiliation
Department of Health Sciences, Finnish Centre for Interdisciplinary Gerontology, Finland. anne.viljanen@sport.jyu.fi
Source
J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2009 Feb;64(2):312-7
Date
Feb-2009
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Accidental Falls - statistics & numerical data
Aged
Aging - genetics - physiology
Audiometry
Confidence Intervals
Female
Finland
Hearing - genetics
Hearing Loss - diagnosis - epidemiology - genetics
Humans
Incidence
Middle Aged
Postural Balance - physiology
Predictive value of tests
Risk assessment
Sampling Studies
Sensitivity and specificity
Twins
Twins, Dizygotic
Twins, Monozygotic
Abstract
The purpose of the present study was to examine, first, whether hearing acuity predicts falls and whether the potential association is explained by postural balance and, second, to examine whether shared genetic or environmental effects underlie these associations.
Hearing was measured using a clinical audiometer as a part of the Finnish Twin Study on Aging in 103 monozygotic and 114 dizygotic female twin pairs aged 63-76 years. Postural balance was indicated as a center of pressure (COP) movement in semi-tandem stance, and participants filled in a fall-calendar daily for an average of 345 days after the baseline.
Mean hearing acuity (better ear hearing threshold level at 0.5-4 kHz) was 21 dB (standard deviation [SD] 12). Means of the COP velocity moment for the best to the poorest hearing quartiles increased linearly from 40.7 mm(2)/s (SD 24.4) to 52.8 mm(2)/s (SD 32.0) (p value for the trend = .003). Altogether 199 participants reported 437 falls. Age-adjusted incidence rate ratios (IRRs) for falls, with the best hearing quartile as a reference, were 1.2 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.4-3.8) in the second, 4.1 (95% CI = 1.1-15.6) in the third, and 3.4 (95% CI = 1.0-11.4) in the poorest hearing quartiles. Adjustment for COP velocity moment decreased IRRs markedly. Twin analyses showed that the association between hearing acuity and postural balance was not explained by genetic factors in common for these traits.
People with poor hearing acuity have a higher risk for falls, which is partially explained by their poorer postural control. Auditory information about environment may be important for safe mobility.
Notes
Cites: Am J Otolaryngol. 1999 Nov-Dec;20(6):371-810609481
Cites: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2008 Feb;63(2):171-818314453
Cites: Gait Posture. 2002 Aug;16(1):1-1412127181
Cites: Arch Neurol. 2003 Jun;60(6):835-912810488
Cites: J Clin Epidemiol. 2003 Jul;56(7):659-6812921935
Cites: J Appl Physiol (1985). 2004 Jan;96(1):308-1512959956
Cites: Ann Epidemiol. 2004 May;14(5):311-815177269
Cites: Acta Otolaryngol. 1973 Aug-Sep;76(2):208-204543916
Cites: J Psychiatr Res. 1975 Nov;12(3):189-981202204
Cites: Prog Clin Biol Res. 1978;24 Pt B:179-84569306
Cites: Dan Med Bull. 1987 Apr;34 Suppl 4:1-243595217
Cites: Lancet. 1987 Aug 1;2(8553):261-42886727
Cites: Age Ageing. 1989 Jan;18(1):31-42711920
Cites: Br J Ind Med. 1992 Feb;49(2):138-411536822
Cites: Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 1993 Jan;102(1 Pt 2):1-168420477
Cites: J Gerontol. 1994 Mar;49(2):M72-848126355
Cites: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 1996 Mar;51(2):M53-638612104
Cites: Br J Audiol. 1999 Feb;33(1):53-910219722
Cites: Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2005 Dec;13(6):343-816282762
Cites: Lancet. 2005 Nov 26;366(9500):1885-9316310556
Cites: J Am Geriatr Soc. 2006 Apr;54(4):613-816686871
Cites: Am J Epidemiol. 2006 Aug 1;164(3):246-5616731575
Cites: Tohoku J Exp Med. 2006 Aug;209(4):291-30116864951
Cites: Age Ageing. 2006 Sep;35 Suppl 2:ii7-ii1116926210
Cites: Curr Pharm Des. 2007;13(1):119-2617266591
Cites: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2007 Apr;62(4):447-5217452741
Cites: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2007 Nov;62(11):1294-918000151
Cites: Int J Audiol. 2007 Dec;46(12):772-918049966
Cites: J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci. 2000 Jan;55(1):M10-610719767
PubMed ID
19182227 View in PubMed
Less detail

Noise sensitivity and hearing disability.

https://arctichealth.org/en/permalink/ahliterature138473
Source
Noise Health. 2011 Jan-Feb;13(50):51-8
Publication Type
Article
Author
Marja Heinonen-Guzejev
Tapani Jauhiainen
Heikki Vuorinen
Anne Viljanen
Taina Rantanen
Markku Koskenvuo
Kauko Heikkilä
Helena Mussalo-Rauhamaa
Jaakko Kaprio
Author Affiliation
Department of Public Health, The Hjelt Institute, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland. marja.heinonen@helsinki.fi
Source
Noise Health. 2011 Jan-Feb;13(50):51-8
Language
English
Publication Type
Article
Keywords
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Audiometry
Case-Control Studies
Ear Protective Devices - utilization
Environmental Exposure - adverse effects
Female
Finland
Hearing Disorders - etiology - prevention & control
Humans
Hypertension - etiology
Logistic Models
Loudness Perception - physiology
Male
Middle Aged
Noise - adverse effects
Self Report
Stress, Psychological - etiology - psychology
Twin Studies as Topic
Abstract
The aim of this study was to investigate the association of noise sensitivity with self-reported hearing disability and hearing levels, with consideration of the role of self-reported history of noise exposure and use of hearing protectors. The study is based on the Finnish Twin Cohort. In 1988, a noise questionnaire was sent to 1005 twin pairs, 1495 individuals (688 men, 807 women) replied. The age range was 31-88 years. Information on some potential confounders was obtained from the questionnaire in 1981 for the same individuals. A subsample of thirty-eight elderly women with noise sensitivity response from 1988 had audiometry data from 2000 to 2001. Noise sensitivity was associated with self-reported hearing disability among all subjects [odds ratio (OR) 1.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.14-2.12] and among women (OR 1.90, 95% CI 1.19-3.04), but no-more significantly among men (OR 1.31, 95% CI 0.86-1.98). The association was primarily seen among younger subjects (50 years or less). The difference between noise sensitive and non-noise sensitive elderly women in the average of thresholds at frequencies of 0.5-4 kHz in the better ear was not significant (Pr = 0.18). Noise sensitivity did not modify the association of hearing disability with the self-reported history of occupational noise exposure. Noise sensitivity was associated with the use of hearing protectors at work. The study shows the importance of recognizing the noise sensitive in noise effect studies, since sensitivity in annoyance has implications in most of the effect categories.
PubMed ID
21173487 View in PubMed
Less detail