2020
DOI: 10.1186/s12889-020-09755-6
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Lifestyle-associated health risk indicators across a wide range of occupational groups: a cross-sectional analysis in 72,855 workers

Abstract: Background Identify and compare health risk indicators for common chronic diseases between different occupational groups. Methods A total of 72,855 participants (41% women) participating in an occupational health service screening in 2014–2019 were included. Occupation was defined by the Swedish Standard Classification of Occupation, and divided into nine major and additionally eight sub-major groups. These were analysed separately, as white- and blue-collar occupations and as low- and high-skilled occupatio… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

6
25
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

2
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 31 publications
(31 citation statements)
references
References 33 publications
6
25
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Solely in relation to CRF, the annual difference in total and cardiovascular disease related health care costs has been reported to be double (41% and 56% higher) in the group with low CRF (mean 29.4 mL/min/kg) and high CRF (mean 45.5 mL/min/kg) [43]. In the present study, blue-collar low-skilled workers had the lowest mean CRF and the highest prevalence of low CRF-an occupational group which has previously been shown to have the most strenuous physical working situation but the lowest level of leisure time exercise [10]. This combination of low CRF and high physical work demands is deleterious and is suggested to both impair work productivity [11,45], as well as to increase the risk of cardiovascular and all-cause mortality compared with individuals with low physical work demands [46].…”
Section: Prevalence Of Low Crfsupporting
confidence: 40%
See 4 more Smart Citations
“…Solely in relation to CRF, the annual difference in total and cardiovascular disease related health care costs has been reported to be double (41% and 56% higher) in the group with low CRF (mean 29.4 mL/min/kg) and high CRF (mean 45.5 mL/min/kg) [43]. In the present study, blue-collar low-skilled workers had the lowest mean CRF and the highest prevalence of low CRF-an occupational group which has previously been shown to have the most strenuous physical working situation but the lowest level of leisure time exercise [10]. This combination of low CRF and high physical work demands is deleterious and is suggested to both impair work productivity [11,45], as well as to increase the risk of cardiovascular and all-cause mortality compared with individuals with low physical work demands [46].…”
Section: Prevalence Of Low Crfsupporting
confidence: 40%
“…In low-skilled white-collar, high-skilled blue-collar, and low-skilled blue-collar, almost half had low CRF at the end of the study period. Together with the previously reported higher prevalence of daily smoking, poorer diet, no regular exercise, and a higher risk of myocardial infarction in these groups compared with highskilled white-collar occupations [10,44], this highlights the need for targeted lifestyle interventions in these occupational groups for future health and sustainability. Solely in relation to CRF, the annual difference in total and cardiovascular disease related health care costs has been reported to be double (41% and 56% higher) in the group with low CRF (mean 29.4 mL/min/kg) and high CRF (mean 45.5 mL/min/kg) [43].…”
Section: Prevalence Of Low Crfmentioning
confidence: 56%
See 3 more Smart Citations