| Literature DB >> 32384642 |
Abstract
This study was conducted to identify the factors associated with successful aging in older adults based on the ecological system model. Data from the 2017 National Survey of the Living Conditions of Korean Elderly were used. Participants comprised 10,074 older adults. The three principal components in the successful aging model developed by Rowe and Kahn, "absence of disease and disease-related disability," "maintenance of high mental and physical function," and "continued engagement with life," were used to determine successful aging. The collected data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, chi-squared test, t-test, and logistic regression. The study results showed that the correlation factors were age, sex, educational level, economic status, heavy drinking, subjective health status, and health screening in the individual system; living arrangement, satisfaction with spouse, and frequency of contacting family, siblings, and relatives in the family system; and the frequency of contacting neighbors and friends, number of close neighbors and friends, and accessibility of neighborhood facilities in the community system. This study is significant because it confirms that individual characteristics and the environmental systems surrounding older adults should be considered for successful aging; it is necessary to develop and apply healthcare intervention programs that consider both of these aspects.Entities:
Keywords: community; ecological system; older adults; successful aging
Year: 2020 PMID: 32384642 PMCID: PMC7246479 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17093220
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Operational Definition of Successful Aging based on Rowe and Kahn’s Model.
| Domain | Indicators | Met Criteria |
|---|---|---|
| Absence of disease and disease-related disability | Number of chronic diseases ≤2 | Satisfied two indicators in this domain |
| No disability | ||
| Maintenance of high mental and physical function | Do all ADL | Satisfied at least three indicators in this domain |
| Do all IADL | ||
| Do all 6 physical activities | ||
| MMSE-DS score: normal | ||
| SGDS-15 score: under 8 points | ||
| Continued engagement with life | Employment | Satisfied at least three indicators in this domain |
| Participation in group activities | ||
| Participation in religious activities | ||
| Participation in volunteering activities | ||
| Participation in lifelong learning |
ADL = Activities of Daily Living; IADL = Instrumental Activities of Daily Living; MMSE-DS = Mini Mental State Examination for Dementia Screening; SGDS-15 = Short Geriatric Depression Scale-15.
The Differences in Successful Aging According to the Individual, Family, and Community System-related Variables. N = 10,074.
| Level | Variables | Categories | Successful Aging | Usual Aging | X2 ( |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n (%) or Mean ± SD | n (%) or Mean ± SD | ||||
| Individual | Age (year) | 65–74 | 1086 (18.6) | 4764 (81.4) | 330.64 *** |
| ≥75 | 257 (6.1) | 3967 (93.9) | |||
| Sex | Male | 761 (17.8) | 3524 (82.2) | 127.05 *** | |
| Female | 581 (10.0) | 5206 (90.0) | |||
| Educational level | No education | 105 (4.4) | 2288 (95.6) | 372.09 *** | |
| Elementary school | 372 (10.8) | 3080 (89.2) | |||
| ≥Middle school | 866 (20.5) | 3363 (79.5) | |||
| Economic Status | 1st quintile | 39 (4.1) | 906 (95.9) | 271.99 *** | |
| 2nd quintile | 129 (6.6) | 1822 (93.4) | |||
| 3rd quintile | 275 (11.9) | 2032 (88.1) | |||
| 4th quintile | 410 (16.8) | 2027 (83.2) | |||
| 5th quintile | 489 (20.1) | 1943 (79.9) | |||
| Heavy drinking | Yes | 842 (11.1) | 6775 (88.9) | 140.35 *** | |
| No | 501 (20.4) | 1955 (79.6) | |||
| Smoking | Yes | 173 (16.8) | 856 (83.2) | 12.02 ** | |
| No | 1170 (12.9) | 7875 (87.1) | |||
| Exercise | Yes | 1028 (15.0) | 5826 (85.0) | 51.59 *** | |
| No | 315 (9.8) | 2905 (90.2) | |||
| Subjective health status | Good | 955 (25.6) | 2770 (74.4) | 850.19 *** | |
| Fair | 257 (10.9) | 2092 (89.1) | |||
| Poor | 131 (3.3) | 3870 (96.7) | |||
| Health screening | Yes | 1209 (14.5) | 7146 (85.5) | 54.87 *** | |
| No | 134 (7.8) | 1584 (92.2) | |||
| Family | Living arrangement | Living alone | 189 (7.8) | 2227 (92.2) | 104.47 *** |
| Living with spouse | 805 (16.4) | 4103 (83.6) | |||
| Living with children | 349 (12.7) | 2401 (87.3) | |||
| Satisfaction with spouse + | Satisfaction | 863 (18.8) | 3734 (81.2) | 49.63 *** | |
| Usual | 150 (10.8) | 1237 (89.2) | |||
| Dissatisfaction | 62 (14.8) | 358 (85.2) | |||
| Satisfaction with children+ | Satisfaction | 1134 (15.0) | 6414 (85.0) | 64.46 *** | |
| Usual | 149 (9.1) | 1485 (90.9) | |||
| Dissatisfaction | 47 (7.2) | 610 (92.8) | |||
| Contact with family/siblings/relatives (time/month) | <1 | 527 (10.2) | 4639 (89.8) | 94.78 *** | |
| 1–4 | 474 (15.8) | 2531 (84.2) | |||
| ≥5 | 342 (18.0) | 1561 (82.0) | |||
| Number of close relatives | 1.15 ± 1.48 | 0.79 ± 1.18 | −8.70 *** | ||
| Community | Contact with friends/neighbors | <1 | 13 (2.0) | 624(98.0) | 105.34 *** |
| 1–4 | 36 (6.4) | 525 (93.6) | |||
| ≥5 | 1293 (14.6) | 7581 (85.4) | |||
| Number of close friends/neighbors | 2.14 ± 2.23 | 1.33 ± 1.85 | −12.64 *** | ||
| Accessibility to neighborhood facilities | 12.60±3.05 | 12.86 ± 2.88 | 2.93 ** |
** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001. + missing data.
The Proportion of Successful Aging, N = 10,074.
| Domains | n (%) |
|---|---|
| Absence of diseases and disease-related disability | 4497 (44.6) |
| Maintenance of high mental and physical function | 8844 (87.8) |
| Continued engagement with life | 2456 (24.4) |
| Successful aging | 1343 (13.3) |
Logistic Regression for Successful Aging related Variables, N = 10,074.
| Level | Variables | Categories | Successful Aging |
|---|---|---|---|
| OR (95% CI) | |||
| Individual | Age (year) | 65–74 | 2.18 (1.86–2.55) *** |
| ≥75 | 1 | ||
| Sex | Male | 1.19 (1.02–1.38) * | |
| Female | 1 | ||
| Educational level | No education | 1 | |
| Elementary school | 1.44 (1.13–1.83) ** | ||
| ≥Middle school | 2.13 (1.68–2.70) *** | ||
| Economic Status | 1st quintile | 1 | |
| 2nd quintile | 1.29 (0.87–1.90) | ||
| 3rd quintile | 1.79 (1.23–2.61) ** | ||
| 4th quintile | 2.33 (1.59–3.40) *** | ||
| 5th quintile | 2.55 (1.73–3.76) *** | ||
| Heavy drinking | Yes | 1 | |
| No | 1.32 (1.15–1.52) *** | ||
| Subjective health status | Good | 6.33 (5.21–7.70) *** | |
| Fair | 2.73 (2.18–3.41) *** | ||
| Poor | 1 | ||
| Health screening | Yes | 1.58 (1.29–1.93) *** | |
| No | 1 | ||
| Family | Living arrangement | Living alone | 1.54 (1.14–2.08) * |
| Living with spouse | 1.11 (0.93-1.33) | ||
| Living with children | 1 | ||
| Satisfaction with spouse | Satisfaction | 1.81 (1.22–2.68) ** | |
| Usual | 1.08 (0.79–1.49) | ||
| Dissatisfaction | 1 | ||
| Contact with family/siblings/relatives (time/month) | <1 | 1 | |
| 1–4 | 1.14 (0.99–1.32) | ||
| ≥5 | 1.32 (1.12–1.56) *** | ||
| Community | Contact with friends/neighbors | <1 | 1 |
| 1–4 | 2.33 (1.20–4.52) * | ||
| ≥5 | 4.10 (2.33–7.22) *** | ||
| Number of close friends/neighbors | 1.06 (1.03–1.09) *** | ||
| Accessibility to neighborhood facilities | 0.95 (0.93–0.97) *** | ||
| (Constant) | 0.01 *** | ||
| Correct prediction (%) | 86.9 | ||
| Hosmer–Lemeshow test | x2 = 6.99, df = 8, | ||
| Nagelkerke R2 | 0.261 | ||
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.