| Literature DB >> 27894258 |
Hyun Ja Lim1, Dae Kee Min2, Lilian Thorpe3, Chel Hee Lee4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Aging raises wide-ranging issues within social, economic, welfare, and health care systems. Life satisfaction (LS) is regarded as an indicator of quality of life which, in turn, is associated with mortality and morbidity in older adults. The objective of this study was to identify the relevant predictors of life satisfaction and to investigate changes in a multidimensional construct of LS over time.Entities:
Keywords: GEE model; Korean Retirement and Income Study (KReIS); Life satisfaction; Longitudinal study; Multidimensional; Older adults
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27894258 PMCID: PMC5126851 DOI: 10.1186/s12877-016-0369-0
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Geriatr ISSN: 1471-2318 Impact factor: 3.921
Fig. 1Multidimensional domains: revised conceptual model for life satisfaction in old population (Cummins, [58])
Baseline demographic characteristics of the study subjects. (N = 3531)
| Covariate | Number of patients (%) |
|---|---|
| Sex | |
| Male | 1448 (41%) |
| Female | 2083 (59%) |
| Age | |
| 65–69 | 1507 (42.7%) |
| 70–74 | 987 (28.0%) |
| 75–79 | 592 (16.8%) |
| ≥80 | 445 (12.6%) |
| Spouse | |
| Yes | 2147 (60.8%) |
| No | 1384 (39.2%) |
| Education | |
| No education | 1248 (35.4%) |
| Elementary School (Grade 1–6) | 1257 (35.7%) |
| Middle school (Grade 7–9) | 397 (11.3%) |
| High school (Grade 10–12) | 405 (11.5%) |
| More than High school | 217 (6.2%) |
| Residential area | |
| Urban | 1497 (42.4%) |
| Rural | 2034 (57.6%) |
| Housing type | |
| Detached House | 2076 (58.8%) |
| Apartment | 967 (27.4%) |
| Others | 488 (13.8%) |
| Household composition type | |
| Single adult | 628 (17.8%) |
| Couple | 1402 (39.8%) |
| Others | 1497 (42.4%) |
| Physical health | |
| Very poor | 828 (23.5%) |
| Poor | 1384 (39.3%) |
| Fair | 663 (18.9%) |
| Good | 591 (16.8%) |
| Very good | 52 (1.5%) |
| Mental health | |
| Very poor | 356 (10.1%) |
| Poor | 996 (28.3%) |
| Fair | 1150 (32.7%) |
| Good | 919 (26.1%) |
| Very good | 96 (2.7%) |
| Private health insurance | |
| Yes | 215 (6.09%) |
| No | 3316 (93.9%) |
| Financial stress index | |
| ≥ 0% | 1466 (51.7%) |
| −100% - 0 | 1056 (37.2%) |
| < -100% | 1009 (11.0%) |
Correaltion between five dimensions of life satisfaction, the overall life satisfaction, and the time-variant covariates
| Health | Finance | Housing | Family relationships | Neighbor relationships | Overalla | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex | −0.160* | −0.036* | −0.053* | −0.055* | −0.001 | −0.083* |
| Age | −0.057* | 0.0001 | −0.030* | −0.098* | −0.133* | −0.094* |
| Education | 0.198* | 0.155* | 0.107* | 0.081* | −0.008* | 0.149* |
*p-value <0.0001
aThe sum of the five dimensions of life satisfaction
Fig. 2Proportion of subjects at each survey time point who reported being satisfied within each of the five satisfaction domains, all subjects combined and within each specific domain by age group. Note that values are the proportion of “Very Satisfied/Satisfied” responses from each LS dimension
Fig. 3Proportion of subjects at each survey time point who reported being satisfied within each of the five satisfaction domains, stratified by sex. Note that values are the proportion of “Very Satisfied/Satisfied” responses from each LS dimension
Fig. 4Proportion of subjects at each survey time point who reported being satisfied within each of the five satisfaction domains, stratified by residential area. Note that values are the proportion of “Very Satisfied/Satisfied” responses from each LS dimension
Health satisfaction. Estimation of odds ratio (OR), 95% confidence interval (C.I), and p-value from longitudinal random effects model
| Covariate | Reference category | OR | 95% CI |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex | Female vs Male | 0.801 | 0.671 – 0.957 | 0.015 |
| Spouse | No vs Yes | 0.746 | 0.634 – 0.891 | 0.001 |
| Education | Elementary vs No education | 1.014 | 0.841 – 1.223 | 0.883 |
| Middle or more vs No education | 1.431 | 1.177 – 1.74 | 0.0003 | |
| Physical health | Good vs Poor | 22.4 | 19.49 – 25.76 | <0.0001 |
| Sex by Mental healtha | female/good vs male/good | 1.009 | 0.818 – 1.245 | 0.933 |
| female/poor vs male/poor | 0.636 | 0.503 – 0.804 | 0.0002 | |
| female/good vs female/poor | 4.293 | 3.52 – 5.235 | <0.0001 | |
| male/good vs male/poor | 2.708 | 2.248 – 3.61 | <0.0001 | |
| female/good vs male/poor | 2.732 | 2.197 – 3.398 | <0.0001 | |
| male/good vs female/poor | 4.255 | 3.372 – 5.369 | <0.0001 |
aThe model has a significant interaction
Financial satisfaction. Estimation of odds ratio (OR), 95% confidence interval (C.I), and p-value from longitudinal random effects model
| Covariate | Reference category | OR | 95% CI |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex | Female vs Male | 1.406 | 1.201 – 1.647 | <0.0001 |
| Education | Elementary vs No education | 1.139 | 0.958 – 1.353 | 0.141 |
| Middle or more vs No education | 1.919 | 1.574 – 2.340 | <0.0001 | |
| House type | Apartment vs Detached House | 1.323 | 1.140 – 1.536 | <0.0001 |
| Others vs Detached House | 0.698 | 0.558 – 0.872 | 0.0002 | |
| Household composition | Couple vs Single | 1.628 | 1.351 - 1.962 | <0.0001 |
| Others vs Single | 1.213 | 1.005 - 1.463 | 0.044 | |
| Physical health | Good vs Poor | 1.747 | 1.514 – 2.016 | <0.0001 |
| Mental health | Good vs Poor | 2.421 | 2.134 – 2.746 | <0.0001 |
| Financial stress | −100% - 0% vs ≥ 0% | 0.652 | 0.576 – 0.739 | <0.0001 |
| < -100% vs ≥ 0% | 0.597 | 0.492 – 0.724 | <0.0001 | |
| Age by Residential areaa | rural/age 65–69 vs urban/age 65–69 | 1.705 | 1.390 – 2.093 | <0.0001 |
| rural/age 70–74 vs urban/age 70–74 | 1.209 | 0.942 – 1.553 | 0.268 | |
| rural/age 75–79 vs urban/age 75–79 | 0.763 | 0.540 – 1.078 | 0.071 | |
| rural/age ≥ 80 vs urban/age ≥ 80 | 0.893 | 0.590 – 1.351 | 0.277 | |
| urban/age 75–79 vs urban/age 65–69 | 1.975 | 1.452 – 2.686 | <0.0001 | |
| urban/age ≥ 80 vs urban/age 65–69 | 2.108 | 1.476 – 3.009 | <0.0001 | |
| rural/age 70–74 vs urban/age 65–69 | 1.868 | 1.485 – 2.350 | <0.0001 |
aThe model has a significant interaction; selected comparisons are presented
Housing satisfaction. Estimation of odds ratio (OR), 95% confidence interval (C.I), and p-value from longitudinal random effects model
| Covariate | Reference category | OR | 95% CI |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 70 - 74 vs 65 - 69 | 1.092 | 0.979 – 1.218 | 0.114 |
| 75 - 79 vs 65 - 69 | 1.109 | 0.968 – 1.272 | 0.136 | |
| ≥ 80 vs 65 – 69 | 1.241 | 1.048 – 1.468 | 0.012 | |
| Education | Elementary vs No education | 1.062 | 0.948 – 1.188 | 0.30 |
| Middle or more vs No education | 1.137 | 1.001 – 1.292 | 0.048 | |
| Residential area | Rural vs Urban | 1.307 | 1.184 – 1.441 | <0.0001 |
| Private health insurance | Yes vs No | 1.374 | 1.152 -1.639 | 0.0004 |
| Physical health | Good vs Poor | 1.538 | 1.368 – 1.728 | <0.0001 |
| Mental health | Good vs Poor | 2.265 | 2.069 – 2.479 | <0.0001 |
| House type by compositiona | APT/couple vs APT/single | 0.986 | 0.777 – 1.253 | 0.91 |
| APT/couple vs Detach/single | 3.033 | 2.516 – 3.655 | <0.0001 | |
| APT/single vs Others/single | 2.812 | 2.002 – 3.95 | <0.0001 | |
| APT/single vs Detach/single | 3.075 | 2.444 -3.869 | <0.0001 | |
| Detach/couple vs Detach/single | 1.596 | 1.378 – 1.848 | <0.0001 | |
| Others/couple vs APT/single | 0.371 | 0.278 – 0.495 | <0.0001 | |
| Others/couple vs Detach/single | 1.14 | 0.895 – 1.453 | 0.289 | |
| Others/single vs APT/single | 0.445 | 0.356 – 0.555 | <0.0001 | |
| Others/single vs Detach/single | 1.367 | 1.175 – 1.59 | <0.0001 |
aThe model has a significant interaction; selected comparisons are presented
Satisfaction with family relationships. Estimation of odds ratio (OR), 95% confidence interval (C.I), and p-value from longitudinal random effects model
| Covariate | Reference category | OR | 95% CI |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex | Female vs Male | 1.239 | 1.111 – 1.383 | 0.0001 |
| Education | Elementary vs No education | 1.306 | 1.166 – 1.463 | <0.0001 |
| Middle or more vs No education | 1.288 | 1.121 – 1.479 | 0.0003 | |
| House type | Apartment vs Detached | 1.190 | 1.063 – 1.333 | 0.0026 |
| Others vs Detached | 0.721 | 0.629 – 0.827 | <0.0001 | |
| Physical health | Good vs Poor | 1.533 | 1.34 - 1.755 | <0.0001 |
| Mental health | Good vs Poor | 3.066 | 2.764 – 3.40 | <0.0001 |
| Financial stress | −100% - 0% vs ≥ 0% | 0.883 | 0.798 – 0.976 | 0.015 |
| < -100% vs ≥ 0% | 0.734 | 0.639 – 0.844 | <0.0001 | |
| Residential area by Household compositiona | rural/single vs urban/single | 2.095 | 1.813 – 2.421 | <0.0001 |
| rural/couple vs urban/couple | 1.063 | 0.878 – 1.286 | 0.41 | |
| rural/others vs urban/others | 1.164 | 0.894 – 1.516 | 0.068 | |
| rural/couple vs urban/single | 1.762 | 1.468 – 2.114 | <0.0001 | |
| rural/couple vs urban/others | 1.745 | 1.397 – 2.179 | <0.0001 | |
| rural/single vs urban/others | 2.075 | 1.713 – 2.514 | <0.0001 |
aThe model has a significant interaction; selected comparisons are presented
Satisfaction with Neighbor Relationships. Estimation of odds ratio (OR), 95% confidence interval (C.I), and p-value from longitudinal random effects model
| Covariate | Reference category | OR | 95% CI |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 70–74 vs 65–69 | 0.968 | 0.873–1.074 | 0.538 |
| 75–79 vs 65–69 | 0.901 | 0.793–1.025 | 0.113 | |
| ≥80 vs 65–69 | 0.685 | 0.589–0.797 | <0.0001 | |
| Residential area | Rural vs Urban | 1.728 | 1.576–1.895 | <0.0001 |
| House type | Apartment vs Detached | 0.639 | 0.579–0.707 | <0.0001 |
| Others vs Detached | 0.617 | 0.541–0.704 | <0.0001 | |
| Physical health | Good vs Poor | 1.501 | 1.322–1.703 | <0.0001 |
| Mental health | Good vs Poor | 2.062 | 1.874–2.269 | <0.0001 |
| Sex by Household compositiona | female/couple vs male/couple | 1.220 | 1.061–1.402 | 0.0052 |
| female/single vs male/single | 1.873 | 1.473–2.383 | <0.0001 | |
| female/others vs male/others | 1.122 | 0.969–1.299 | 0.121 | |
| female/couple vs male/single | 2.213 | 1.733–2.826 | <0.0001 | |
| female/single vs male/couple | 1.033 | 0.903–1.180 | 0.638 | |
| female/others vs female/single | 0.849 | 0.745–0.967 | 0.014 |
aThe model has a significant interaction; selected comparisons are presented