Ekaterina Zotcheva1, Sverre Bergh2,3, Geir Selbæk2,3,4, Steinar Krokstad5,6, Asta Kristine Håberg7,8, Bjørn Heine Strand3,4,9, Linda Ernstsen1. 1. Department of Public Health and Nursing, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway. 2. Centre for Old Age Psychiatric Research, Innlandet Hospital Trust, Ottestad, Norway. 3. Norwegian National Advisory Unit on Aging and Health, Vestfold Hospital Trust, T-nsberg, Norway. 4. Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway. 5. Department of Public Health and Nursing, HUNT Research Centre, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway. 6. Levanger Hospital, Nord-Tr-ndelag Hospital Trust, Norway. 7. Department of Neuromedicine and Movement Science, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway. 8. Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Norwegian National Advisory Unit on Functional MRI, St. Olav's Hospital, Trondheim, Norway. 9. Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo, Norway.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Physical activity (PA) is associated with a decreased dementia risk, whereas psychological distress (distress) is linked to an increased dementia risk. OBJECTIVE: We investigated independent and joint associations of midlife moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) and distress with incident dementia. METHODS: Our study comprised 28,916 participants aged 30-60 years from the Nord-Trøndelag Health Study (HUNT1, 1984-1986). Data on MVPA and distress from HUNT1 was linked to the Health and Memory Study in Nord-Trøndelag for dementia case identification. Participants were followed from 1995 until 2011. We used adjusted Cox regression models to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). RESULTS: In fully adjusted analyses, MVPA was associated with a reduced dementia risk (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.62-1.06), compared to no MVPA. Distress was associated with an increased dementia risk (HR 1.30, 95% CI 0.99-1.70). Compared to distressed participants not taking part in MVPA, non-distressed no-MVPA participants had a reduced dementia risk (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.54-0.96). The same applied to distressed MVPA participants (HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.22-1.14), and non-distressed MVPA participants (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.44-0.90). Our results indicated an additive interaction between MVPA and distress on dementia risk. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that midlife MVPA reduces risk of incident dementia among both distressed and non-distressed individuals.
BACKGROUND: Physical activity (PA) is associated with a decreased dementia risk, whereas psychological distress (distress) is linked to an increased dementia risk. OBJECTIVE: We investigated independent and joint associations of midlife moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) and distress with incident dementia. METHODS: Our study comprised 28,916 participants aged 30-60 years from the Nord-Trøndelag Health Study (HUNT1, 1984-1986). Data on MVPA and distress from HUNT1 was linked to the Health and Memory Study in Nord-Trøndelag for dementia case identification. Participants were followed from 1995 until 2011. We used adjusted Cox regression models to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CI). RESULTS: In fully adjusted analyses, MVPA was associated with a reduced dementia risk (HR 0.81, 95% CI 0.62-1.06), compared to no MVPA. Distress was associated with an increased dementia risk (HR 1.30, 95% CI 0.99-1.70). Compared to distressed participants not taking part in MVPA, non-distressed no-MVPA participants had a reduced dementia risk (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.54-0.96). The same applied to distressed MVPA participants (HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.22-1.14), and non-distressed MVPA participants (HR 0.63, 95% CI 0.44-0.90). Our results indicated an additive interaction between MVPA and distress on dementia risk. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that midlife MVPA reduces risk of incident dementia among both distressed and non-distressed individuals.
Authors: Bo Kyung Sohn; Min Soo Byun; Dahyun Yi; So Yeon Jeon; Jun Ho Lee; Young Min Choe; Dong Woo Lee; Jun-Young Lee; Yu Kyeong Kim; Chul-Ho Sohn; Dong Young Lee Journal: J Alzheimers Dis Date: 2022 Impact factor: 4.160
Authors: Jill P Pell; Frederick K Ho; Carlos Celis-Morales; Fanny Petermann-Rocha; Donald M Lyall; Stuart R Gray; Jason M R Gill; Naveed Sattar; Paul Welsh; Terence J Quinn; William Stewart Journal: BMC Med Date: 2021-12-02 Impact factor: 8.775
Authors: Paula Iso-Markku; Urho M Kujala; Keegan Knittle; Juho Polet; Eero Vuoksimaa; Katja Waller Journal: Br J Sports Med Date: 2022-03-17 Impact factor: 18.473
Authors: Ana Luiza Dallora; Leandro Minku; Emilia Mendes; Mikael Rennemark; Peter Anderberg; Johan Sanmartin Berglund Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-09-14 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Takashi Tarumi; Tsubasa Tomoto; Justin Repshas; Ciwen Wang; Linda S Hynan; C Munro Cullum; David C Zhu; Rong Zhang Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2020-10-29 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: Gill Livingston; Jonathan Huntley; Andrew Sommerlad; David Ames; Clive Ballard; Sube Banerjee; Carol Brayne; Alistair Burns; Jiska Cohen-Mansfield; Claudia Cooper; Sergi G Costafreda; Amit Dias; Nick Fox; Laura N Gitlin; Robert Howard; Helen C Kales; Mika Kivimäki; Eric B Larson; Adesola Ogunniyi; Vasiliki Orgeta; Karen Ritchie; Kenneth Rockwood; Elizabeth L Sampson; Quincy Samus; Lon S Schneider; Geir Selbæk; Linda Teri; Naaheed Mukadam Journal: Lancet Date: 2020-07-30 Impact factor: 79.321