Allostatic Load and Health in the Older Population of England

A Crossed-Lagged Analysis

Bibliographic Data

ID19308656
AuthorsSue Read (0000-0002-5532-8746, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, corresponding author), Sanna Read, Emily Grundy (0000-0002-4059-0311), Emily M D Grundy (0000-0002-9633-1116)
Year2014
Volume76
Issue7
Pages490-496
Publication date2014-09-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenuePsychosomatic Medicine (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0033-3174 • E-ISSN: 1534-7796
PublisherOvid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1097/psy.0000000000000083
PMID25153937
PMCIDPMC4418773
OpenAlexW2025257950
LanguageEN
Citations received19
References cited41

OBJECTIVE: Allostatic load, a composite measure of accumulated physical wear and tear, has been proposed as an early sign of physiological dysregulation predictive of health problems, functional limitation, and disability. However, much previous research has been cross sectional and few studies consider repeated measures. We investigate the directionality of associations between allostatic load, self-rated health, and a measure of physical function (walking speed). METHODS: The sample included men and women 60 and older who participated in Wave 2 (2004) and Wave 4 (2008) of the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (n = 6132 in Wave 2). Allostatic load was measured with nine biomarkers using a multisystem summary approach. Self-rated health was measured using a global 5 point summary indicator. Time to walk 8 ft was used as a measure of function. We fitted and tested autoregressive cross-lagged models between the allostatic load measure, self-rated health, and walking speed in Waves 2 and 4. Models were adjusted for age, sex, educational level, and smoking status at Wave 2 and for time-varying indicators of marital status, wealth, physical activity, and social support. RESULTS: Allostatic load predicted slower walking speed (standardized estimate = -0.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.10 to -0.05). Better self-rated health predicted faster walking speed (standardized estimate = 0.11, 95% CI = 0.08-0.13) as well as lower allostatic load (standardized estimate = -0.15, 95% CI = -0.22 to -0.09), whereas paths from allostatic load and walking speed to self-rated health were weaker (standardized estimates = -0.05 [95% CI = -0.07 to -0.02] and 0.06 [95% CI = 0.04-0.08]). CONCLUSIONS: Allostatic load can be a useful risk indicator of subsequent poor health or function

Allostasis · Allostatic load · Confidence interval · Physical therapy · Preferred walking speed · Balance, Gait, and Falls Prevention · Demography · Internal Medicine · Medicine · Nutrition and Health in Aging · Physical Activity and Health · Psychology · Gerontology

Tools

Open DOISci-HubOpen Access