Hyun Woong Roh1, Yunhwan Lee2, Kang Soo Lee3, Ki Jung Chang1, Jinhee Kim2, Soo Jin Lee2, Joung Hwan Back4, Young Ki Chung5, Ki Young Lim5, Jai Sung Noh5, Sang Joon Son6, Chang Hyung Hong7. 1. Department of Psychiatry, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Republic of Korea; Institute on Aging, Ajou University Medical Center, Suwon, Republic of Korea. 2. Department of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Republic of Korea; Institute on Aging, Ajou University Medical Center, Suwon, Republic of Korea. 3. Department of Psychiatry, CHA University School of Medicine, CHA Hospital, Gangnam, Republic of Korea. 4. National Health Insurance Service, Seoul, Republic of Korea. 5. Department of Psychiatry, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Republic of Korea. 6. Department of Psychiatry, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Republic of Korea; Institute on Aging, Ajou University Medical Center, Suwon, Republic of Korea. Electronic address: sjsonpsy@ajou.ac.kr. 7. Department of Psychiatry, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Republic of Korea; Institute on Aging, Ajou University Medical Center, Suwon, Republic of Korea. Electronic address: antiaging@ajou.ac.kr.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Our study aimed to assess the longitudinal association of frequency of contact with non-cohabitating adult children and risk of depression in the elderly. METHODS: Elderly aged ≥60 years were included from Living Profiles of Older People Survey (LPOPS) in Korea. The baseline assessment, Wave 1, was conducted in 2008, and follow-up assessment, Wave 2, was conducted in 2011. We included participants who completed both waves and excluded those who met the following criteria: no adult children, living with adult children, cognitive impairment at either waves, and depression at baseline (n=4398). We defined infrequent contact as <1 time per month face-to-face contact or <1 time per week phone contact and classified participants into four groups based on contact method and frequency. Depression was measured using the 15-item geriatric depression scales (SGDS-K). RESULTS: In multivariable logistic regression analysis, infrequent face-to-face and phone contact group had adjusted odds ratio (OR) of 1.86 (95% CI, 1.44-2.42) when compared with frequent face-to-face and phone contact group. Frequent face-to-face contact with infrequent phone contact group and infrequent face-to-face contact with frequent phone contact group had adjusted OR of 1.49 (95% CI, 1.12-1.98) and 1.44 (95% CI, 1.15-1.80), respectively, when compared with frequent face-to-face and phone contact group. CONCLUSION: These results propose that the risk of subsequent depression in elderly is associated with frequency of contact with non-cohabitating adult children. Moreover, the efficacy of face-to-face contact and that of phone contact were similar, while the group lacking both types of contact demonstrated the highest risk of depression.
PURPOSE: Our study aimed to assess the longitudinal association of frequency of contact with non-cohabitating adult children and risk of depression in the elderly. METHODS: Elderly aged ≥60 years were included from Living Profiles of Older People Survey (LPOPS) in Korea. The baseline assessment, Wave 1, was conducted in 2008, and follow-up assessment, Wave 2, was conducted in 2011. We included participants who completed both waves and excluded those who met the following criteria: no adult children, living with adult children, cognitive impairment at either waves, and depression at baseline (n=4398). We defined infrequent contact as <1 time per month face-to-face contact or <1 time per week phone contact and classified participants into four groups based on contact method and frequency. Depression was measured using the 15-item geriatric depression scales (SGDS-K). RESULTS: In multivariable logistic regression analysis, infrequent face-to-face and phone contact group had adjusted odds ratio (OR) of 1.86 (95% CI, 1.44-2.42) when compared with frequent face-to-face and phone contact group. Frequent face-to-face contact with infrequent phone contact group and infrequent face-to-face contact with frequent phone contact group had adjusted OR of 1.49 (95% CI, 1.12-1.98) and 1.44 (95% CI, 1.15-1.80), respectively, when compared with frequent face-to-face and phone contact group. CONCLUSION: These results propose that the risk of subsequent depression in elderly is associated with frequency of contact with non-cohabitating adult children. Moreover, the efficacy of face-to-face contact and that of phone contact were similar, while the group lacking both types of contact demonstrated the highest risk of depression.
Authors: Tran Dai Tri Han; Keiko Nakamura; Kaoruko Seino; Vo Nu Hong Duc; Thang Van Vo Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-02-08 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Ranran Zheng; Mingyang Yu; Li Huang; Fang Wang; Baizhi Gao; Duanduan Fu; Jinghui Zhu; Guilin Liu Journal: Front Public Health Date: 2022-10-03