Department of Psychiatry, Boston University Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
National Center for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder, VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2024 Apr 1;79(4). doi: 10.1093/geronb/gbae011.
Prospective associations between coping and all-cause mortality risk are understudied, particularly among nonmedical samples. We assessed independent and joint associations of multiple components of the transactional stress and coping model with all-cause mortality in a cohort of community-dwelling men. We were particularly interested in how coping effort related to mortality.
Participants included 743 men from the Veterans Affairs Normative Aging Study who completed 1+ stress and coping assessment in 1993-2002 (baseline age: M = 68.4, standard deviation [SD] = 7.1) and had mortality follow-up through 2020. The Brief California Coping Inventory assessed coping with a past-month stressor. Cox regression evaluated associations of problem stressfulness, coping strategies, total coping effort, and coping efficiency with all-cause mortality risk.
Over a mean follow-up of 16.7 years (SD = 7.1), 473 (64%) men died. Problem stressfulness was not associated with mortality risk (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.07, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.98-1.17), adjusted for demographics and health conditions. When examining coping via specific strategies, only social coping was associated with higher mortality risk (HR: 1.15, 95% CI: 1.05-1.26) after Bonferroni correction. Total coping effort was associated with 14% greater risk of all-cause mortality (95% CI: 1.04-1.26), independent of problem stressfulness, demographics, and health conditions. Coping efficiency, a benefit-cost ratio of coping efficacy to total coping effort, was not associated with mortality risk in adjusted models.
Total coping effort may be an important indicator for longevity among aging men, above and beyond problem stressfulness and specific coping strategies, which have been the foci in prior research.
应对与全因死亡率风险之间的前瞻性关联在研究中较少涉及,尤其是在非医疗样本中。我们评估了交易压力和应对模型的多个组成部分与社区居住男性队列中全因死亡率的独立和联合关联。我们特别关注应对努力与死亡率的关系。
参与者包括退伍军人事务常态老化研究中的 743 名男性,他们在 1993-2002 年期间完成了 1 次以上的压力和应对评估(基线年龄:M=68.4,标准差[SD]=7.1),并通过 2020 年进行了死亡率随访。简短的加利福尼亚应对量表评估了过去一个月压力源的应对情况。Cox 回归评估了问题压力、应对策略、总应对努力和应对效率与全因死亡率风险的关系。
在平均 16.7 年(SD=7.1)的随访期间,473 名(64%)男性死亡。问题压力与死亡率风险无关(危险比[HR]:1.07,95%置信区间[CI]:0.98-1.17),调整了人口统计学和健康状况。当通过特定策略检查应对时,只有社会应对与更高的死亡率风险相关(HR:1.15,95%CI:1.05-1.26),在经过 Bonferroni 校正后。总应对努力与全因死亡率增加 14%的风险相关(95%CI:1.04-1.26),独立于问题压力、人口统计学和健康状况。在调整模型中,应对效率,即应对效果与总应对努力的效益成本比,与死亡率风险无关。
总应对努力可能是老年男性长寿的一个重要指标,超过了问题压力和特定应对策略,这些一直是先前研究的重点。