BackgroundA job-related factor is attracting a growing interest as a possible determinant of body weight gain in shift-workers.ObjectiveThe aim of the study was to reinvestigate the issue of overweight between rotating shift workers and daytime workers, taking into consideration possible confounding covariate factors.MethodsThis is a cross-sectional study, conducted by reviewing data from subjects participating in an occupational surveillance program in 2008. Participants answered a self-administered questionnaire to retrieve information about socio-demographic factors and working conditions (job schedule type, job-related physical activity, time in job), subjective health status, health care visits during the previous year, and lifestyle factors (dietary habits, leisure time physical activity, alcohol consumption). Participants underwent a medical examination for measurement of BMI, and acquisition of medical history.ResultsCompared to daytime workers (N = 229), rotating shift workers (N = 110) displayed higher BMI (mean BMI was 27.6±3.9 and 26.7±3.6 for shift workers, and daytime workers, respectively; p<0.05). Logistic regression analysis allowed to highlight the role of rotating shift-work as an independent risk factor for increased body weight (OR 1.93, 95%CI 1.01–3.71), being aged between 35 and 54 years was a major determinant of increased BMI (OR 2.39, 95%CI 1.14–5.00). In addition, family history of obesity was the strongest determinant of overweight/obesity (OR 9.79, 95%CI 1.28–74.74). Interestingly, no significant association was found between overweight and other potentially relevant factors, such as diet quality and food choices, alcohol consumption, levels of occupational and leisure-time physical activity.ConclusionsPresent findings seem to support the notion that rotating shift work is an independent risk factor for overweight, regardless of workers' dietary habits and physical activity levels.

: A brief questionnaire has been developed to measure behaviour related to dietary fat intake. It is self‐administered and self‐coded. Mean completion time is about three minutes. Criterion validity was assessed by comparison with a well‐established food frequency questionnaire using 124 adults from Newcastle and Sydney. The correlations with the questionnaire scores were: r = 0.55 for total fat as a percentage of total energy, r = 0.67 for saturated fat as a percentage of total energy, and r = 0.44 for polyunsaturated to saturated fat ratio. Reproducibility was assessed by re‐use by 25 subjects after seven to nine months (r = 0.85). When used in a community survey of over 300 randomly chosen people in the Hunter Region, the mean scores for men and for women and among different age groups were significantly different. The questionnaire was strongly associated with other scales measuring attitudes, behaviour and knowledge related to low‐fat diets. The questionnaire appears suitable for rapid self‐assessment by subjects, and as it directs their attention to aspects of their diet which might need improvement, it could be used for health education. It might also be used for epidemiological studies to rank subjects broadly according to their fat‐intake behaviour.

No abstract

A needs survey was administered by mail in the Coalfields area of the Hunter region (a lower socioeconomic area around Cessnock) and in a higher socioeconomic area of Newcastle. The purpose was to assist planning for Coalfields Healthy Heartbeat—a community‐action heart disease prevention program. Response rates from random samples of residents were 435/897 (49 per cent) for the Coalfields and 565/875 (65 per cent) for Newcastle. In both study areas heart attack was ranked eleventh from a list of 17 potential community worries, well below drugs, crime, road safety, the environment, cancer and ‘loss of health’. Coalfields respondents were more worried about all issues on the list than were the residents in Newcastle and were less likely to have heard about recent health promotion campaigns. Coalfields respondents felt that heart disease prevention was the responsibility of the individual, the family, and the medical profession, in that order, and much less the responsibility of local community groups. Results suggest that health promotion strategies incorporating values, language and symbols that are meaningful to distinct subgroups may be more successful than disease‐specific programs aimed at the general population.