Journal Articles

Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://mro.massey.ac.nz/handle/10179/7915

Browse

Filters

2021 - 20222

Settings

Has files: YesSubject: search.filters.subject.hearing

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Do self-reported hearing and visual impairments predict longitudinal dementia in older adults?
    (Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of The American Geriatrics Society, 2021-06) Pabst A; Bär J; Röhr S; Löbner M; Kleineidam L; Heser K; Hajek A; van der Leeden C; Wiese B; Maier W; Angermeyer MC; Scherer M; Wagner M; König H-H; Riedel-Heller SG
    Background Sensory impairments have been associated with dementia in older adults. However, the contribution of different impairments and how they interact in the development of dementia is not clear. We examined the independent and interaction effects of hearing impairment (HI) and visual impairment (VI) on incident dementia. Design Multi-centric population-based prospective cohort study. Setting Data were taken from the AgeDifferent.de platform, pooling participants aged 75 and older from the German LEILA75+ and AgeCoDe/AgeQualiDe cohorts. Participants Older adults (N = 3497) with mean age 79.8 years, 67.2% female. Measurements Standardized interviews and questionnaires were used to assess self-reported HI and VI at baseline and all-cause dementia in 9 follow-ups, spanning over 20 years. Methods Competing risk regression models were conducted to test the main and interaction effects of HI and VI on dementia incidence, adjusting for established risk factors of dementia and accumulated mortality. Results HI and VI at baseline were reported by 30.3% and 16.6% of individuals, respectively. Adjusting for baseline information on sociodemographics, substance use, cognitive functioning and morbidity, and controlling for accumulated mortality risk, HI (sHR 1.16, 95% CI 1.04–1.30, p = 0.011) but not VI (sHR 1.07, 95% CI 0.90–1.28, p = 0.462) was significantly associated with incident dementia. There was no interaction between HI and VI (sHR 1.09, 95% CI 0.81–1.46, p = 0.567). Conclusions Hearing impairment is associated with an increased incidence of all-cause dementia in older adults. There is no excess risk or risk compensation through the additional presence or absence of visual impairment. Early prevention measures for hearing impairment might help to reduce the long-term risk of dementia.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Evaluation of the Dangerous Decibels Brazil Program in Workers Exposed to Noise
    (Frontiers Media S.A., 2022-07-14) Bramati L; Marques JM; Gonçalves CGO; Welch D; Reddy R; Lacerda ABDM; Ye B
    INTRODUCTION: Noise-induced hearing loss can be avoided by taking preventive measures. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of the Brazilian version of the Dangerous Decibels® program for noise-exposed workers, using the ecological model as an educational intervention plan. METHOD: Non-randomized interventional study with a quantitative, experimental trial design, conducted at a meatpacking company. The participants were divided into two groups-the first one (n = 132, divided into 6 subgroups) received the Dangerous Decibels® Brazil educational intervention (DDBEI) adapted to workers while the second group (n = 138, divided into 5 subgroups) received a conventional educational intervention (CEI). The interventions lasted 50 min. The Hearing Protection Assessment Questionnaire (HPA-5) was administered before and after the interventions. The five dimensions (attitude, behavior, knowledge, supports, and barriers) were compared using the Student's t-test for paired data (<0.05). RESULTS: After both the DDBEI and CEI training, workers improved significantly in barriers, supports, knowledge, attitudes, and behavior around noise. By chance, the CEI group scored lower in all measures than the DDBEI group before training, and though both groups improved, the difference was maintained after training. CONCLUSION: The Brazilian version of the Dangerous Decibels® program for noise-exposed workers was effective, influencing positively the factors at different levels of the ecological model. Though the DDBEI was no more effective than the CEI, the CEI participants began at much lower levels, so the effectiveness of the DDBEI may have been underestimated.