Is there a biomedical explanation for socioeconomic differences in incident mobility limitation?

Annemarie Koster, Brenda W J H Penninx, Hans Bosma, Gertrudis I J M Kempen, Tamara B. Harris, Anne B. Newman, Ronica N. Rooks, Susan M. Rubin, Eleanor Marie Simonsick, Jacques T M Van Eijk, Stephen B. Kritchevsky

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background. The association between low socioeconomic status and poor physical functioning has been well described; biomedical factors may play an important role in explaining these differences. This study examines the association between socioeconomic status and incident mobility limitation in well-functioning older adults, and seeks to determine whether this link could be explained by biomedical factors. Methods. Data were obtained from 3066 men and women, aged 70-79 years from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and Memphis, Tennessee participating in the Health, Aging and Body Composition (Health ABC) study. Three indicators of socioeconomic status were used: education, income, and ownership of financial assets. Mobility limitation was defined as reporting difficulty walking 1/4 mile or climbing 10 steps during two consecutive semiannual assessments over 4.5 years. Biomedical factors included a wide range of diseases (e.g., heart and cerebrovascular disease) and biological risk factors (e.g. hypertension, poor pulmonary function, and high serum levels of inflammatory markers). Results. Adjusted hazard ratios of incident mobility limitation were significantly higher in those persons with low education, low income, and few assets. Hazard ratios ranged from 1.66 to 2.80 in the lowest socioeconomic groups. Additional adjustment for biomedical factors reduced the hazard ratios by an average of 41% for education, 17% for income, and 29% for assets. Conclusion. Biomedical factors can account for some of the association between socioeconomic status and incident mobility limitation. However, to reduce physical disabilities and, in particular, the socioeconomic differences therein, it may not be sufficient to solely intervene upon biological risk factors and risks of diseases.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1022-1027
Number of pages6
JournalJournals of Gerontology - Series A Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences
Volume60
Issue number8
StatePublished - Aug 2005
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Mobility Limitation
Social Class
Biological Factors
Education
Cerebrovascular Disorders
Ownership
Body Composition
Pulmonary Hypertension
Heart Diseases
Health
Serum

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Aging

Cite this

Koster, A., Penninx, B. W. J. H., Bosma, H., Kempen, G. I. J. M., Harris, T. B., Newman, A. B., ... Kritchevsky, S. B. (2005). Is there a biomedical explanation for socioeconomic differences in incident mobility limitation? Journals of Gerontology - Series A Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences, 60(8), 1022-1027.

Is there a biomedical explanation for socioeconomic differences in incident mobility limitation? / Koster, Annemarie; Penninx, Brenda W J H; Bosma, Hans; Kempen, Gertrudis I J M; Harris, Tamara B.; Newman, Anne B.; Rooks, Ronica N.; Rubin, Susan M.; Simonsick, Eleanor Marie; Van Eijk, Jacques T M; Kritchevsky, Stephen B.

In: Journals of Gerontology - Series A Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences, Vol. 60, No. 8, 08.2005, p. 1022-1027.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Koster, A, Penninx, BWJH, Bosma, H, Kempen, GIJM, Harris, TB, Newman, AB, Rooks, RN, Rubin, SM, Simonsick, EM, Van Eijk, JTM & Kritchevsky, SB 2005, 'Is there a biomedical explanation for socioeconomic differences in incident mobility limitation?', Journals of Gerontology - Series A Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences, vol. 60, no. 8, pp. 1022-1027.
Koster, Annemarie ; Penninx, Brenda W J H ; Bosma, Hans ; Kempen, Gertrudis I J M ; Harris, Tamara B. ; Newman, Anne B. ; Rooks, Ronica N. ; Rubin, Susan M. ; Simonsick, Eleanor Marie ; Van Eijk, Jacques T M ; Kritchevsky, Stephen B. / Is there a biomedical explanation for socioeconomic differences in incident mobility limitation?. In: Journals of Gerontology - Series A Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences. 2005 ; Vol. 60, No. 8. pp. 1022-1027.
@article{4192aeed86a040658d0449b3124d4adc,
title = "Is there a biomedical explanation for socioeconomic differences in incident mobility limitation?",
abstract = "Background. The association between low socioeconomic status and poor physical functioning has been well described; biomedical factors may play an important role in explaining these differences. This study examines the association between socioeconomic status and incident mobility limitation in well-functioning older adults, and seeks to determine whether this link could be explained by biomedical factors. Methods. Data were obtained from 3066 men and women, aged 70-79 years from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and Memphis, Tennessee participating in the Health, Aging and Body Composition (Health ABC) study. Three indicators of socioeconomic status were used: education, income, and ownership of financial assets. Mobility limitation was defined as reporting difficulty walking 1/4 mile or climbing 10 steps during two consecutive semiannual assessments over 4.5 years. Biomedical factors included a wide range of diseases (e.g., heart and cerebrovascular disease) and biological risk factors (e.g. hypertension, poor pulmonary function, and high serum levels of inflammatory markers). Results. Adjusted hazard ratios of incident mobility limitation were significantly higher in those persons with low education, low income, and few assets. Hazard ratios ranged from 1.66 to 2.80 in the lowest socioeconomic groups. Additional adjustment for biomedical factors reduced the hazard ratios by an average of 41{\%} for education, 17{\%} for income, and 29{\%} for assets. Conclusion. Biomedical factors can account for some of the association between socioeconomic status and incident mobility limitation. However, to reduce physical disabilities and, in particular, the socioeconomic differences therein, it may not be sufficient to solely intervene upon biological risk factors and risks of diseases.",
author = "Annemarie Koster and Penninx, {Brenda W J H} and Hans Bosma and Kempen, {Gertrudis I J M} and Harris, {Tamara B.} and Newman, {Anne B.} and Rooks, {Ronica N.} and Rubin, {Susan M.} and Simonsick, {Eleanor Marie} and {Van Eijk}, {Jacques T M} and Kritchevsky, {Stephen B.}",
year = "2005",
month = "8",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "60",
pages = "1022--1027",
journal = "Journals of Gerontology - Series A Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences",
issn = "1079-5006",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Is there a biomedical explanation for socioeconomic differences in incident mobility limitation?

AU - Koster, Annemarie

AU - Penninx, Brenda W J H

AU - Bosma, Hans

AU - Kempen, Gertrudis I J M

AU - Harris, Tamara B.

AU - Newman, Anne B.

AU - Rooks, Ronica N.

AU - Rubin, Susan M.

AU - Simonsick, Eleanor Marie

AU - Van Eijk, Jacques T M

AU - Kritchevsky, Stephen B.

PY - 2005/8

Y1 - 2005/8

N2 - Background. The association between low socioeconomic status and poor physical functioning has been well described; biomedical factors may play an important role in explaining these differences. This study examines the association between socioeconomic status and incident mobility limitation in well-functioning older adults, and seeks to determine whether this link could be explained by biomedical factors. Methods. Data were obtained from 3066 men and women, aged 70-79 years from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and Memphis, Tennessee participating in the Health, Aging and Body Composition (Health ABC) study. Three indicators of socioeconomic status were used: education, income, and ownership of financial assets. Mobility limitation was defined as reporting difficulty walking 1/4 mile or climbing 10 steps during two consecutive semiannual assessments over 4.5 years. Biomedical factors included a wide range of diseases (e.g., heart and cerebrovascular disease) and biological risk factors (e.g. hypertension, poor pulmonary function, and high serum levels of inflammatory markers). Results. Adjusted hazard ratios of incident mobility limitation were significantly higher in those persons with low education, low income, and few assets. Hazard ratios ranged from 1.66 to 2.80 in the lowest socioeconomic groups. Additional adjustment for biomedical factors reduced the hazard ratios by an average of 41% for education, 17% for income, and 29% for assets. Conclusion. Biomedical factors can account for some of the association between socioeconomic status and incident mobility limitation. However, to reduce physical disabilities and, in particular, the socioeconomic differences therein, it may not be sufficient to solely intervene upon biological risk factors and risks of diseases.

AB - Background. The association between low socioeconomic status and poor physical functioning has been well described; biomedical factors may play an important role in explaining these differences. This study examines the association between socioeconomic status and incident mobility limitation in well-functioning older adults, and seeks to determine whether this link could be explained by biomedical factors. Methods. Data were obtained from 3066 men and women, aged 70-79 years from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania and Memphis, Tennessee participating in the Health, Aging and Body Composition (Health ABC) study. Three indicators of socioeconomic status were used: education, income, and ownership of financial assets. Mobility limitation was defined as reporting difficulty walking 1/4 mile or climbing 10 steps during two consecutive semiannual assessments over 4.5 years. Biomedical factors included a wide range of diseases (e.g., heart and cerebrovascular disease) and biological risk factors (e.g. hypertension, poor pulmonary function, and high serum levels of inflammatory markers). Results. Adjusted hazard ratios of incident mobility limitation were significantly higher in those persons with low education, low income, and few assets. Hazard ratios ranged from 1.66 to 2.80 in the lowest socioeconomic groups. Additional adjustment for biomedical factors reduced the hazard ratios by an average of 41% for education, 17% for income, and 29% for assets. Conclusion. Biomedical factors can account for some of the association between socioeconomic status and incident mobility limitation. However, to reduce physical disabilities and, in particular, the socioeconomic differences therein, it may not be sufficient to solely intervene upon biological risk factors and risks of diseases.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=24144441703&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=24144441703&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 60

SP - 1022

EP - 1027

JO - Journals of Gerontology - Series A Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences

JF - Journals of Gerontology - Series A Biological Sciences and Medical Sciences

SN - 1079-5006

IS - 8

ER -