Ryoko Kawakami1, Susumu S Sawada2, Kiminori Kato3, Yuko Gando4, Haruki Momma5, Hideaki Oike6, Motohiko Miyachi7, I-Min Lee8, Steven N Blair9, Minoru Tashiro10, Chika Horikawa11, Yasuhiro Matsubayashi12, Takaho Yamada12, Kazuya Fujihara12, Hirohito Sone13. 1. Faculty of Sport Sciences, Waseda University, Saitama, Japan; Department of Physical Activity Research, National Institutes of Biomedical Innovation, Health and Nutrition, Tokyo, Japan; Department of Hematology, Endocrinology and Metabolism, Niigata University Faculty of Medicine, Niigata, Japan. 2. Faculty of Sport Sciences, Waseda University, Saitama, Japan. 3. Department of Laboratory Medicine and Clinical Epidemiology for Prevention of Noncommunicable Diseases, Niigata University Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Niigata, Japan. 4. Department of Physical Activity Research, National Institutes of Biomedical Innovation, Health and Nutrition, Tokyo, Japan; Department of Hematology, Endocrinology and Metabolism, Niigata University Faculty of Medicine, Niigata, Japan. 5. Department of Hematology, Endocrinology and Metabolism, Niigata University Faculty of Medicine, Niigata, Japan; Department of Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan. 6. Food Research Institute, National Agriculture and Food Research Organization, Tsukuba, Japan. 7. Department of Physical Activity Research, National Institutes of Biomedical Innovation, Health and Nutrition, Tokyo, Japan. 8. Division of Preventive Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass; Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, Mass. 9. Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC. 10. Niigata Association of Occupational Health, Niigata, Japan. 11. Department of Hematology, Endocrinology and Metabolism, Niigata University Faculty of Medicine, Niigata, Japan; Department of Health and Nutrition, University of Niigata Prefecture Faculty of Human Life Studies, Niigata, Japan. 12. Department of Hematology, Endocrinology and Metabolism, Niigata University Faculty of Medicine, Niigata, Japan. 13. Department of Hematology, Endocrinology and Metabolism, Niigata University Faculty of Medicine, Niigata, Japan. Electronic address: sone@med.niigata-u.ac.jp.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Several cross-sectional studies have linked higher physical fitness with better hearing sensitivity but have not established a causal relation; none have used a prospective design that is less susceptible to bias. We used a prospective cohort study to investigate the association between muscular and performance fitness and the incidence of hearing loss. METHODS: A total of 21,907 participants without hearing loss received physical fitness assessments between April 2001 and March 2002. Muscular and performance fitness index, an age- and sex-specific summed z-score based on grip strength, vertical jump height, single-leg balance, forward bending, and whole-body reaction time was calculated. Participants were classified into quartiles according to the muscular and performance fitness index and each physical fitness test. They were followed up for the development of hearing loss, assessed by pure-tone audiometry at annual health examinations between April 2002 and March 2008. Hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals for hearing loss incidence were estimated using Cox proportional hazards regression models. RESULTS: During follow-up, 2765 participants developed hearing loss. The hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for developing hearing loss across the muscular and performance fitness index quartiles (lowest to highest) were 1.00 (reference), 0.88 (0.79-0.97), 0.83 (0.75-0.93), and 0.79 (0.71-0.88) (Ptrend <.001). Among the various physical fitness components, a clear dose-response association with hearing loss incidence was observed for vertical jump height and single-leg balance (Ptrend <.001 for both). CONCLUSION: Higher muscular and performance fitness is associated with a lower incidence of hearing loss.
BACKGROUND: Several cross-sectional studies have linked higher physical fitness with better hearing sensitivity but have not established a causal relation; none have used a prospective design that is less susceptible to bias. We used a prospective cohort study to investigate the association between muscular and performance fitness and the incidence of hearing loss. METHODS: A total of 21,907 participants without hearing loss received physical fitness assessments between April 2001 and March 2002. Muscular and performance fitness index, an age- and sex-specific summed z-score based on grip strength, vertical jump height, single-leg balance, forward bending, and whole-body reaction time was calculated. Participants were classified into quartiles according to the muscular and performance fitness index and each physical fitness test. They were followed up for the development of hearing loss, assessed by pure-tone audiometry at annual health examinations between April 2002 and March 2008. Hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals for hearing loss incidence were estimated using Cox proportional hazards regression models. RESULTS: During follow-up, 2765 participants developed hearing loss. The hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for developing hearing loss across the muscular and performance fitness index quartiles (lowest to highest) were 1.00 (reference), 0.88 (0.79-0.97), 0.83 (0.75-0.93), and 0.79 (0.71-0.88) (Ptrend <.001). Among the various physical fitness components, a clear dose-response association with hearing loss incidence was observed for vertical jump height and single-leg balance (Ptrend <.001 for both). CONCLUSION: Higher muscular and performance fitness is associated with a lower incidence of hearing loss.
Authors: Hiroshi Miyake; Takehiro Michikawa; Satsue Nagahama; Keiko Asakura; Yuji Nishiwaki Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-09-28 Impact factor: 4.614