Assessment of psychological resilience in a large cohort of the general population: Validation and norm values of the RS-5.

BACKGROUND: Psychological resilience is known as a protective factor against mental health disorders for which valid measures are indispensable. The present work aims to evaluate the Resilience Scale-5 (RS-5) psychometrically, and provide norm values. METHODS: Data from the Gutenberg Health Study (GHS), encompassing 7,496 participants aged 25 to 86, spanning the years 2017 to 2022, was used. Selectivity, item difficulty, internal consistency, construct and factor validity, as well as factorial invariance were tested. Additionally, correlations and associations with depression, anxiety, and sociodemographic factors were determined. Furthermore, norm values were provided. RESULTS: The RS-5 displayed robust psychometric properties. Participants reported an average resilience score of 28.94 (SD = 5.53, median = 30, IQR = 6, range = 5-35), with those aged ≥75 exhibiting the highest resilience levels (M = 30.21, SD = 5.75, median = 32, IQR = 7). The RS-5 displayed a very good model fit, affirming measurement invariance across sex and age decades. Construct validity found support through anticipated intercorrelations with related psychological constructs. Significant correlations (p < .001) linked higher resilience with female gender, advanced age, higher education, elevated household income, and diminished psychological distress. CONCLUSION: The RS-5 emerged as a reliable and economic instrument for assessing psychological resilience in individuals aged 25 to 86. The study unraveled distinct sociodemographic characteristics significantly tied to resilience levels within this cohort. In contributing recent norm values tailored to the German population, this research enhances the practical applicability of the RS-5 across diverse contexts and enriches our comprehension of the demographic nuances associated with psychological resilience.

Noise annoyance and cardiovascular disease risk: results from a 10-year follow-up study.

The relationship between noise annoyance and risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) still needs to be fully elucidated. Thus, we examined the relationship between noise annoyance and CVD risk in a large population-based cohort study. Cross-sectional (N = 15,010, aged 35-74 years, baseline investigation period 2007-2012) and prospective data (5- and 10-year follow-up from 2012 to 2022) from the Gutenberg Health Study were used to examine the relationship between noise annoyance due to different sources and risk of prevalent and incident CVD comprising atrial fibrillation, coronary artery disease, myocardial infarction, stroke, chronic heart failure, peripheral artery disease, and venous thromboembolism. In cross-sectional analyses, noise annoyance was an independent risk factor for prevalent CVD, with the strongest associations seen for noise annoyance during sleep (e.g., neighborhood noise annoyance: odds ratio 1.20, 95% confidence interval 1.13-1.27, p < 0.0001). While in the 10-year follow-up, mostly positive associations (although not significant) between noise annoyance and incident CVD were observed, no indication of increased CVD risk was observed after 5 years of follow-up. Noise annoyance due to different sources was associated with prevalent CVD, whereas only weak associations with incident CVD were found. Further large-scale studies are needed to establish the relationship between noise annoyance and risk of CVD.

Cumulative social disadvantage and cardiovascular disease burden and mortality.

AIMS: To investigate the association between cumulative social disadvantage and cardiovascular burden and mortality in a large cohort of the general population. METHODS AND RESULTS: Cross-sectional (n = 15 010, aged 35 to 74 years, baseline investigation period 2007 to 2012) and longitudinal data (5- and 10-year follow-ups from 2012 to 2022) from the Gutenberg Health Study were used to investigate the association between individual socioeconomic status (SES, measured via a validated questionnaire) and cardiovascular disease (CVD, composite of atrial fibrillation, coronary artery disease, myocardial infarction, stroke, chronic heart failure, peripheral artery disease, and/or venous thromboembolism) risk and mortality. Subjects with prevalent CVD had a lower SES sum score, as well as lower education, occupation, and household net-income scores (all P < 0.0001). Logistic regression analysis showed that a low SES (vs. high, defined by validated cut-offs) was associated with 19% higher odds of prevalent CVD [odds ratio (OR) 1.19, 95% CI 1.01; 1.40] in the fully adjusted model. At 5-year follow-up, low SES was associated with both increased cardiovascular [hazard ratio (HR) 5.36, 2.24; 12.82] and all-cause mortality (HR 2.23, 1.51; 3.31). At 10-year follow-up, low SES was associated with a 68% higher risk of incident CVD (OR 1.68, 1.12; 2.47) as well as 86% higher all-cause mortality (HR 1.86, 1.55; 2.24). In general, the education and occupation scores were stronger related to risk of CVD and death than the household net-income score. Low SES was estimated to account for 451.45 disability-adjusted life years per 1000 people (years lived with disability 373.41/1000 and years of life lost 78.03/1000) and an incidence rate of 11 CVD cases and 3.47 CVD deaths per 1000 people per year. The population attributable fraction for CVD incidence after 5 years was 4% due to low SES. CONCLUSION: Despite universal healthcare access, cumulative social disadvantage remains associated with higher risk of CVD and mortality. Dimensions of education and occupation, but not household net income, are associated with outcomes of interest.

Low socioeconomic status is associated with higher risk of incident cardiovascular disease (CVD) and mortality in a large cohort of the general population even after comprehensive adjustment for associated variables. Education and occupation may be more important regarding CVD and mortality risk as compared to the household net income. From a public health perspective, policies should strengthen efforts to reduce socioeconomic inequalities by ensuring equal access to education and employment.

Age standardization and time-of-day performance for the Oldenburg Sentence Test (OLSA): results from the population-based Gutenberg Health Study.

PURPOSE: The Oldenburg Sentence Test (OLSA) is a German matrix test designed to determine speech recognition thresholds (SRT). It is widely used for hearing-aids and cochlear implant fitting, but an age-adjusted standard is still lacking. In addition, knowing that the ability to concentrate is an important factor in OLSA performance, we hypothesized that OLSA performance would depend on the time of day it was administered. The aim of this study was to propose an age standardization for the OLSA and to determine its diurnal performance. METHODS: The Gutenberg Health Study is an ongoing population-based study and designed as a single-centre observational, prospective cohort study. Participants were interviewed about common otologic symptoms and tested with pure-tone audiometry and OLSA. Two groups-subjects with and without hearing loss-were established. The OLSA was performed in two runs. The SRT was evaluated for each participant. Results were characterized by age in 5-year cohorts, gender and speech recognition threshold (SRT). A time stamp with an hourly interval was also implemented. RESULTS: The mean OLSA SRT was - 6.9 ± 1.0 dB (group 1 male) and - 7.1 ± 0.8 dB (group 1 female) showing an inverse relationship with age in the whole cohort, whereas a linear increase was observed in those without hearing loss. OLSA-SRT values increased more in males than in females with increasing age. No statistical significance was found for the diurnal performance. CONCLUSIONS: A study with 2900 evaluable Oldenburg Sentence Tests is a novelty and representative for the population of Mainz and its surroundings. We postulate an age- and gender-standardized scale for the evaluation of the OLSA. In fact, with an intergroup standard deviation (of about 1.5 dB) compared to the age dependence of 0.7 dB/10 years, this age normalization should be considered as clinically relevant.

Vertigo and its burden of disease-Results from a population-based cohort study.

Objectives: Vertigo describes symptoms of abnormal movement of the environment or the patient's own body. As such, it affects patients' quality of life, prevents them from following their daily activities, and increases healthcare utilization. The Global Burden of Disease Project aims to quantify morbidity and mortality worldwide. In 2013, a separate disability weight for vertigo was introduced. The aim of this study is to estimate the symptom burden of disease caused by vertigo. Methods: This study analyzes data from the Gutenberg Health Study (GHS). The GHS is a population-based cohort study representative of the city of Mainz and its district. Participants were asked whether they suffered from vertigo and, if so, how bothered they felt by it, rating their distress on a six-level scale from 1 = little stressful to 6 = extremely stressful. Results: Eight thousand five hundred and nineteen participants could be included in the study. The overall prevalence of vertigo was 21.6% (95%-confidence interval [CI] [20.7%; 22.5%]). Vertigo prevalence peaked in the age group of 55-64 years. Vertigo annoyance averaged 2.42 (±1.28). When an annoyance of 3-6 was considered bothersome, the prevalence of bothersome vertigo was 8.1 % (95%-CI [7.5%; 8.7%]). Age-standardized to the European Standard Population 2013, vertigo caused a burden of 2102 years lived with disability per 100,000 population. Conclusion: In this study, it was found that one in five people suffer at least occasionally from vertigo. This result suggests a significant burden of disease. This burden is reported at the symptom level. Future studies are needed to attribute the burden to specific causes. Level of Evidence: 2.

Acute exposure to simulated nocturnal traffic noise and cardiovascular complications and sleep disturbance-results from a pooled analysis of human field studies.

OBJECTIVES: A series of human field studies demonstrated that acute exposure to simulated nocturnal traffic noise is associated with cardiovascular complications and sleep disturbance, including endothelial dysfunction, increased blood pressure, and impaired sleep quality. A pooled analysis of these results remains to be established and is of tremendous interest to consolidate scientific knowledge. METHODS: We analyzed data from four randomized crossover studies (published between 2013 to 2021 and conducted at the University Medical Center Mainz, Germany). A total of 275 subjects (40.4% women, mean age 43.03 years) were each exposed to one control scenario (regular background noise) and at least to one traffic noise scenario (60 aircraft or train noise events) in their homes during nighttime. After each night, the subjects visited the study center for comprehensive cardiovascular function assessment, including the measurement of endothelial function and hemodynamic and biochemical parameters, as well as sleep-related variables. RESULTS: The pooled analysis revealed a significantly impaired endothelial function when comparing the two different noise sequences (0-60 vs. 60-0 simulated noise events, mean difference in flow-mediated dilation -2.00%, 95% CI -2.32; -1.68, p < 0.0001). In concordance, mean arterial pressure was significantly increased after traffic noise exposure (mean difference 2.50 mmHg, 95% CI 0.54; 4.45, p = 0.013). Self-reported sleep quality, the restfulness of sleep, and feeling in the morning were significantly impaired after traffic noise exposure (all p < 0.0001). DISCUSSION: Acute exposure to simulated nocturnal traffic noise is associated with endothelial dysfunction, increased mean arterial pressure, and sleep disturbance.

Noise annoyance and risk of prevalent and incident atrial fibrillation-A sex-specific analysis.

Background: While chronic exposure to high levels of noise was demonstrated to increase the risk of various cardiovascular diseases, the association between noise annoyance and risk of cardiovascular disease remains still inconsistent. Recently, we showed that noise annoyance is associated with prevalent atrial fibrillation in the general population. However, the association between noise annoyance and risk of incident atrial fibrillation as well as potential sex-differences remain still elusive. Methods and results: 15,010 subjects from a German population-based cohort were examined at baseline (2007 to 2012) and follow-up five years later (2012 to 2017) to investigative the association between noise annoyance due to multiple sources and prevalent and incident atrial fibrillation. After multivariable adjustment, the results from logistic regression analyses revealed overall consistent and positive associations between noise annoyance and prevalent and incident atrial fibrillation in men, whereas this association was weaker in women, in particular with respect to incident atrial fibrillation. For instance, industrial noise annoyance was associated with 21% (95% confidence interval (CI) 9-34%) and 18% (8-29%) higher odds of prevalent atrial fibrillation in men and women, respectively. In prospective analysis, this association remained stable in men (odds ratio (OR) 1.25, 1.07-1.44), while in women no association was observed (OR 1.03, 0.89-1.18). Conclusions: The findings suggest that noise annoyance can increase the risk of incident atrial fibrillation in a large population-based cohort and that men may be more sensitive to the adverse effects of noise annoyance with regard to the risk of atrial fibrillation.