Table 4.
Estimations of the effect (i.e. Hazard Ratio) of socio-demographic variables on discontinuation of hearing aid use
| Independent variables | Univariate Hazard Ratio (95% CI) | Adjusted Hazard Ratioa (95% CI) |
|---|---|---|
| Gender | ||
| Male | Reference | Reference |
| Female | 1.51 (0.96–2.38) | 1.30 (0.78–2.18) |
| Age | 1.04 (1.00–1.07) | 1.00 (0.95–1.04) |
| Education (years) | 0.94 (0.89–0.99)* | 0.96 (0.90–1.02) |
| Education (quintiles) | ||
| 1° Quintile | Reference | Reference |
| 2° Quintile | 0.65 (0.35–1.24) | 0.73 (0.36–1.50) |
| 3° Quintile | 0.78 (0.41–1.49) | 1.45 (0.70–2.97) |
| 4° Quintile | 0.41 (0.19–0.88)* | 0.48 (0.20–1.16) |
| 5° Quintile | 0.50 (0.24–1.01) | 0.55 (0.26–1.18) |
| Income (in Chilean pesos) | 1.00 (0.99–1.00) | 1.00 (0.99–1.00) |
| Income (quintiles) | ||
| 1° Quintile | Reference | Reference |
| 2° Quintile | 0.68 (0.34–1.37) | 0.82 (0.40–1.70) |
| 3° Quintile | 1.32 (0.73–2.38) | 1.35 (0.71–2.59) |
| 4° Quintile | 0.40 (0.19–0.86)* | 0.65 (0.29–1.47) |
| 5° Quintile | 0.49 (0.22–1.12) | 0.39 (0.16–0.96)* |
a Models for which each independent variable was adjusted by age, gender, self-perceived state of health and auditory problems, satisfaction with the hearing aid and income quintiles. Education and income quintiles were not simultaneously included in the adjusted models due to collinearity
Statistically significant effects are highlighted in bold: *p < 0.05