Socioeconomic factors from midlife predict mobility limitation and depressed mood three decades later; findings from the AGES-Reykjavik Study.

To access publisher's full text version of this article, please click on the hyperlink in Additional Links field or click on the hyperlink at the top of the page marked Files. This article is open access.Taking into account our rapidly ageing population, older people are of particular interest in studying health inequalities. Most studies of older persons only include measures of current socioeconomic status (SES) and do not take into account data from earlier stages of life. In addition, only classic SES measures are used, while alternative measures, such as car ownership and house ownership, might equally well predict health. The present study aims to examine the effect of midlife socioeconomic factors on mobility limitation and depressed mood three decades later.Data were from 4,809 men and women aged 33-65 years who participated in the Reykjavik Study (1967-1992) and who were re-examined in old age in the Age, Gene/Environment Susceptibility (AGES) -Reykjavik Study (2002-2006).Education and occupation predicted mobility limitation and depressed mood. Independently, home and car ownership and the availability of housing features predicted mobility limitation. Shortages of food in childhood and lack of a car in midlife predicted depressed mood.Socioeconomic factors from midlife and from childhood affect mobility limitation and depressed mood in old age. Prevention of health problems in old age should begin as early as midlife.NIH/N01-AG-12100 NIA Intramural Research Program Hjartavernd (the Icelandic Heart Association) Althingi (the Icelandic Parliament

Lack of basic and luxury goods and health-related dysfunction in older persons; Findings from the longitudinal SMILE study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>More so than the traditional socioeconomic indicators, such as education and income, wealth reflects the accumulation of resources and makes socioeconomic ranking manifest and explicitly visible to the outside world. While the lack of basic goods, such as a refrigerator, may affect health directly, via biological pathways, the lack of luxury goods, such as an LCD television, may affect health indirectly through psychosocial mechanisms. We set out to examine, firstly, the relevance of both basic and luxury goods in explaining health-related dysfunction in older persons, and, secondly, the extent to which these associations are independent of traditional socioeconomic indicators.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Cross-sectional and longitudinal data from 2067 men and women aged 55 years and older who participated in the Study on Medical Information and Lifestyles Eindhoven (SMILE) were gathered. Logistic regression analyses were used to study the relation between a lack of basic and luxury goods and health-related function, assessed with two sub-domains of the SF-36.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The lack of basic goods was closely related to incident physical (OR = 2.32) and mental (OR = 2.12) dysfunction, even when the traditional measures of socioeconomic status, i.e. education or income, were taken into account. Cross-sectional analyses, in which basic and luxury goods were compared, showed that the lack of basic goods was strongly associated with mental dysfunction. Lack of luxury goods was, however, not related to dysfunction.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Even in a relatively wealthy country like the Netherlands, the lack of certain basic goods is not uncommon. More importantly, lack of basic goods, as an indicator of wealth, was strongly related to health-related dysfunction also when traditional measures of socioeconomic status were taken into account. In contrast, no effects of luxury goods on physical or mental dysfunction were found. Future longitudinal research is necessary to clarify the precise mechanisms underlying these effects.</p