Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-nwzlb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-29T10:51:54.940Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Gender difference in the incidence of shingles

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 January 2004

D. M. FLEMING
Affiliation:
Birmingham Research Unit of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 54 Lordswood Road, Harborne, Birmingham B17 9DB, UK
K. W. CROSS
Affiliation:
Birmingham Research Unit of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 54 Lordswood Road, Harborne, Birmingham B17 9DB, UK
W. A. COBB
Affiliation:
Birmingham Research Unit of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 54 Lordswood Road, Harborne, Birmingham B17 9DB, UK
R. S. CHAPMAN
Affiliation:
Birmingham Research Unit of the Royal College of General Practitioners, 54 Lordswood Road, Harborne, Birmingham B17 9DB, UK
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

We investigated age- and gender-specific incidence of shingles reported in a large sentinel practice network monitoring a defined population over the years 1994–2001. In total, 5915 male and 8617 female incident cases were studied. For each age group, we calculated the relative risk of females to males presenting with shingles. Incidence rates of chickenpox and herpes simplex were examined similarly. Shingles incidence was greater in females in each age group (except for 15–24 years). Relative risks (female to male) were greatest in age groups 45–64 years (1·48) and 0–14 years (1·43). There were no gender differences in the incidence of chickenpox except in the 15–24 years age group (female excess): for herpes simplex there were female excesses in all age groups. Gender-specific age-standardized incidence rates of shingles were calculated for each year and showed a consistent female excess in each of the 8 years (average annual excess 28%).

Type
Research Article
Copyright
© 2004 Cambridge University Press