Body mass index, blood pressure, and glucose and lipid metabolism among permanent and fixed-term workers in the manufacturing industry: a cross-sectional study

Abstract

BackgroundTemporary employment, a precarious form of employment, is recognized as social determinant of poor health. However, evidence supporting precarious employment as a risk factor for health is mainly obtained from subjective data. Studies using objective clinical measurement data in the assessment of health status are limited. This study compared body mass index (BMI), lipid and glucose metabolism, and health-related lifestyle factors between permanent workers and fixed-term workers employed in the manufacturing industry.MethodsData of 1,701 male manufacturing industry workers <50 years old in Japan were collected and analyzed. Anthropometric data were BMI, calculated using measured height and weight of study participants, and blood pressure. For lipid metabolism, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and triglyceride levels were determined. For glucose metabolism, fasting plasma glucose and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels were measured. Multiple regression analysis adjusted for age and lifestyle factors was performed.ResultsBMI was significantly higher in permanent workers (22.9 kg/m2) compared with fixed-term workers (22.4 kg/m2). The leaner population (BMI < 18.5) was greater among fixed-term workers (8.3%) compared with permanent workers (4.0%), whereas the overweight population (BMI ≥ 25.0) was greater among permanent workers (21.4%) compared with fixed-term workers (18.1%). Although fixed-term workers tended not to be overweight, regression analysis adjusted for age and lifestyle factors suggested that fixed-term employment was significantly associated with higher blood pressure (systolic β = 2.120, diastolic β = 2.793), triglyceride (β = 11.147), fasting blood glucose (β = 2.218), and HbA1c (β = 0.107) compared with permanent workers (all p < 0.01).ConclusionsFixed-term workers showed more health risks, such as poorer blood pressure and lipid and glucose metabolism, even when adjusted for age and lifestyle variables, although BMI of fixed-term workers were lower than permanent workers. Precarious work might contribute to a deteriorating health status even among less overweight populations.

Dietary interventions to prevent and manage diabetes in worksite settings: a meta-analysis

“…Most of the educational sessions covered lifestyle modification, focusing on improving diet, increasing physical activity, and smoking cessation. Three studies had environmental level interventions that involved providing a Japanese style healthy lunch 64) in one case and a Mediterranean lunch 54) in another and environmental prompts 48) in the form of brief messages that encourage employees to make healthy choices such as low calorie foods at vending machines and increase physical activity at staircases. Only one study 58) reported using a behavioral change model as a basis for planning the intervention but did not specify the model.…”

Differences in Metabolic Syndrome Prevalence by Employment Type and Sex

“…Psychological stress and physical health problems in non-standard workers increase the risk of chronic and acute diseases; furthermore, the social, physiological, and self-rated health of workers become lowered [ 30 ]. Finally, the difference in socioeconomic status due to unstable employment is a factor for health deterioration and social determinants of health [ 1 ]. Problems associated with low socioeconomic status among these non-standard workers have a greater impact on female workers than male workers, which ultimately increases the prevalence of MetS among female non-standard workers.…”

“…Since the 2008 financial crisis, economic uncertainty has persisted throughout the world and this has resulted in continual job instability [ 1 ]. In Korea, unstable jobs such as non-standard employment began to emerge during the International Monetary Fund (IMF) economic crisis in 1997, and this trend has continued to this day [ 2 ].…”

Do flexicurity policies protect workers from the adverse health consequences of temporary employment? A cross-national comparative analysis

“…Inconsistencies have emerged, for example, between studies that report worse health outcomes ( e.g. Benavides, Duran & Gimeno, 2015 ; Inoue, Minami & Yano, 2014 ; Kim, Khang & Muntaner, 2008 ; Minelli, Pigini & Chiavarini, 2014 ; Pirani and Salvini, 2015 ; Quesnel-Vallée, DeHaney & Ciampi, 2010 ; Waenerlund et al, 2011 ) and those that report similar or better outcomes among temporary workers ( e.g. Bardasi & Francesconi, 2004 ; De Moortel, Vandenheede & Vanroelen, 2014 ; Liukkonen, Virtanen & Kivimäki, 2004 ; Virtanen, Vahtera & Kivimäki, 2002 ).…”