IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0287949.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Association of marital/partner status with hospital readmission among young adults with acute myocardial infarction

Author

Listed:
  • Cenjing Zhu
  • Rachel P Dreyer
  • Fan Li
  • Erica S Spatz
  • César Caraballo
  • Shiwani Mahajan
  • Valeria Raparelli
  • Erica C Leifheit
  • Yuan Lu
  • Harlan M Krumholz
  • John A Spertus
  • Gail D’Onofrio
  • Louise Pilote
  • Judith H Lichtman

Abstract

Introduction: Despite evidence supporting the benefits of marriage on cardiovascular health, the impact of marital/partner status on the long-term readmission of young acute myocardial infarction (AMI) survivors is less clear. We examined the association between marital/partner status and 1-year all-cause readmission and explored sex differences among young AMI survivors. Methods: Data were from the VIRGO study (Variation in Recovery: Role of Gender on Outcomes of Young AMI Patients), which enrolled young adults aged 18–55 years with AMI (2008–2012). The primary end point was all-cause readmission within 1 year of hospital discharge, obtained from medical records and patient interviews and adjudicated by a physician panel. We performed Cox proportional hazards models with sequential adjustment for demographic, socioeconomic, clinical, and psychosocial factors. Sex-marital/partner status interaction was also tested. Results: Of the 2,979 adults with AMI (2002 women [67.2%]; mean age 48 [interquartile range, 44–52] years), unpartnered individuals were more likely to experience all-cause readmissions compared with married/partnered individuals within the first year after hospital discharge (34.6% versus 27.2%, hazard ratio [HR] = 1.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.15–1.49). The association attenuated but remained significant after adjustment for demographic and socioeconomic factors (adjusted HR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.01–1.34), and it was not significant after further adjusting for clinical factors and psychosocial factors (adjusted HR, 1.10; 95%CI, 0.94–1.28). A sex-marital/partner status interaction was not significant (p = 0.69). Sensitivity analysis using data with multiple imputation and restricting outcomes to cardiac readmission yielded comparable results. Conclusions: In a cohort of young adults aged 18–55 years, unpartnered status was associated with 1.3-fold increased risk of all-cause readmission within 1 year of AMI discharge. Further adjustment for demographic, socioeconomic, clinical, and psychosocial factors attenuated the association, suggesting that these factors may explain disparities in readmission between married/partnered versus unpartnered young adults. Whereas young women experienced more readmission compared to similar-aged men, the association between marital/partner status and 1-year readmission did not vary by sex.

Suggested Citation

  • Cenjing Zhu & Rachel P Dreyer & Fan Li & Erica S Spatz & César Caraballo & Shiwani Mahajan & Valeria Raparelli & Erica C Leifheit & Yuan Lu & Harlan M Krumholz & John A Spertus & Gail D’Onofrio & Loui, 2024. "Association of marital/partner status with hospital readmission among young adults with acute myocardial infarction," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(1), pages 1-12, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0287949
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0287949
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0287949
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0287949&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0287949?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Molloy, Gerard John & Stamatakis, Emmanuel & Randall, Gemma & Hamer, Mark, 2009. "Marital status, gender and cardiovascular mortality: Behavioural, psychological distress and metabolic explanations," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 223-228, July.
    2. Noreen Goldman, 1993. "Marriage selection and mortality patterns: Inferences and fallacies," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 30(2), pages 189-208, May.
    3. Joung, Inez M. A. & van de Mheen, H. Dike & Stronks, Karien & van Poppel, Frans W. A. & Mackenbach, Johan P., 1998. "A longitudinal study of health selection in marital transitions," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 425-435, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Puthiery Va & Wan-Shui Yang & Sarah Nechuta & Wong-Ho Chow & Hui Cai & Gong Yang & Shan Gao & Yu-Tang Gao & Wei Zheng & Xiao-Ou Shu & Yong-Bing Xiang, 2011. "Marital Status and Mortality among Middle Age and Elderly Men and Women in Urban Shanghai," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(11), pages 1-10, November.
    2. Kenneth Couch & Christopher Tamborini & Gayle Reznik, 2015. "The Long-Term Health Implications of Marital Disruption: Divorce, Work Limits, and Social Security Disability Benefits Among Men," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 52(5), pages 1487-1512, October.
    3. Requena, Miguel & Reher, David, 2021. "Partnership and mortality in mid and late life: Protection or selection?," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 279(C).
    4. Fritzell, Sara & Ringbäck Weitoft, Gunilla & Fritzell, Johan & Burström, Bo, 2007. "From macro to micro: The health of Swedish lone mothers during changing economic and social circumstances," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 65(12), pages 2474-2488, December.
    5. Jake J. Hays, 2023. "Multipartner Fertility and Psychological Distress: Evidence for Social Selection," Population Research and Policy Review, Springer;Southern Demographic Association (SDA), vol. 42(3), pages 1-30, June.
    6. Ribar, David C., 2004. "What Do Social Scientists Know About the Benefits of Marriage? A Review of Quantitative Methodologies," IZA Discussion Papers 998, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    7. Susan Averett & Laura Argys & Julia Sorkin, 2013. "In sickness and in health: an examination of relationship status and health using data from the Canadian National Public Health Survey," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 11(4), pages 599-633, December.
    8. Takashi Saito & Kumiko Imahashi & Chikako Yamaki, 2024. "The First Use of the Washington Group Short Set in a National Survey of Japan: Characteristics of the New Disability Measure in Comparison to an Existing Disability Measure," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 21(12), pages 1-19, December.
    9. Kuo-Liang Chang & George Langelett & Andrew Waugh, 2011. "Health, Health Insurance, and Decision to Exit from Farming," Journal of Family and Economic Issues, Springer, vol. 32(2), pages 356-372, June.
    10. Janice Compton & Robert A Pollak, 2021. "The life expectancy of older couples and surviving spouses," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(5), pages 1-13, May.
    11. Rong Fu & Haruko Noguchi, 2018. "Does the positive relationship between health and marriage reflect protection or selection? Evidence from middle-aged and elderly Japanese," Review of Economics of the Household, Springer, vol. 16(4), pages 1003-1016, December.
    12. Giammarco Alderotti & Cecilia Tomassini & Daniele Vignoli, 2022. "‘Silver splits’ in Europe: The role of grandchildren and other correlates," Demographic Research, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research, Rostock, Germany, vol. 46(21), pages 619-652.
    13. Lorant, V. & Kunst, Anton E. & Huisman, Martijn & Bopp, Matthias & Mackenbach, Johan, 2005. "A European comparative study of marital status and socio-economic inequalities in suicide," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 60(11), pages 2431-2441, June.
    14. Owen O'Donnell & Eddy Van Doorslaer & Tom Van Ourti, 2013. "Health and Inequality," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 13-170/V, Tinbergen Institute.
    15. Berntsen, Kjersti Norgård & Kravdal, Øystein, 2012. "The relationship between mortality and time since divorce, widowhood or remarriage in Norway," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(12), pages 2267-2274.
    16. Manzoli, Lamberto & Villari, Paolo & M Pirone, Giovanni & Boccia, Antonio, 2007. "Marital status and mortality in the elderly: A systematic review and meta-analysis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 77-94, January.
    17. Molloy, Gerard John & Stamatakis, Emmanuel & Randall, Gemma & Hamer, Mark, 2009. "Marital status, gender and cardiovascular mortality: Behavioural, psychological distress and metabolic explanations," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 223-228, July.
    18. Megan Beckett & Marc N. Elliott, 2002. "Does the Association Between Marital Status and Health Vary by Sex, Race, and Ethnicity?," Working Papers 02-08, RAND Corporation.
    19. Sara Zella, 2017. "Marital Status Transitions and Self-Reported Health among Canadians: A Life Course Perspective," Applied Research in Quality of Life, Springer;International Society for Quality-of-Life Studies, vol. 12(2), pages 303-325, June.
    20. Woojin Chung & Roeul Kim, 2014. "Does Marriage Really Matter to Health? Intra- and Inter-Country Evidence from China, Japan, Taiwan, and the Republic of Korea," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(8), pages 1-10, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0287949. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.