Marital histories, marital support, and bone density: findings from the Midlife in the United States Study
- 375 Downloads
We examined the association between marital life history and bone mineral density (BMD) in a national sample from the US. In men, being stably married was independently associated with better lumbar spine BMD, and in women, more spousal support was associated with better lumbar spine BMD.
Adult bone mass may be influenced by stressors over the life course. We examined the association between marital life history and bone mineral density (BMD) net socioeconomic and behavioral factors known to influence bone mass. We sought evidence for a gender difference in the association between marital history and adult BMD.
We used data from 632 adult participants in the Midlife in the United States Study to examine associations between marital history and BMD, stratified by gender, and adjusted for age, weight, menopausal stage, medication use, childhood socioeconomic advantage, adult financial status, education, physical activity, smoking, and alcohol consumption.
Compared to stably married men, men who were currently divorced, widowed, or separated, men who were currently married but previously divorced, widowed, or separated, and never married men had 0.33 (95 % CI: 0.01, 0.65), 0.36 (95 % CI: 0.10, 0.83), and 0.53 (95 % CI: 0.23, 0.83) standard deviations lower lumbar spine BMD, respectively. Among men married at least once, every year decrement in age at first marriage (under age 25) was associated with 0.07 SD decrement in lumbar spine BMD (95 % CI: 0.002, 0.13). In women, greater support from the spouse was associated with higher lumbar spine BMD.
Our findings suggest that marriage before age 25 and marital disruptions are deleterious to bone health in men, and that marital quality is associated with better bone health in women.
KeywordsBone density Marital history Marital quality Marital status Osteoporosis
- 1.USPSTF (2011) Screening for osteoporosis: U.S. preventive services task force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med 154:356–364Google Scholar
- 5.Foundation NO (2013) Clinician’s guide to prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. National Osteoporosis Foundation, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
- 12.Karlamangla AS, Mori T, Merkin SS, Seeman TE, Greendale GA, Binkley N, Crandall CJ (2013) Childhood Socioeconomic Status and Adult Femoral Neck Bone Strength: Findings from The Midlife in the United States Study. BoneGoogle Scholar
- 18.Ross M, Goldsteen (1990) The Impact of the Fam on Health: The Decade in Rev J Fam and the Fam 52:1059–1078Google Scholar
- 20.Brim OG, Ryff CD, Kessler RC (2004) How healthy are we? A national study of well-being at midlife. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
- 28.Gerstel NRC, Rosenfield S (1985) Explaining the sumptomatology of separated and divorced men and women: the role of material conditions and social networks. Oxford J 64:84–101Google Scholar
- 29.Rosen CJ, American Society for Bone and Mineral Research. (2009) Primer on the metabolic bone diseases and disorders of mineral metabolism. American Society for Bone and Mineral Research, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
- 35.American Psychological Association (2000) Resolution on poverty and socioeconomic status. American Psychological Association, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar