M A Veazie1, G S Smith. 1. College of Public Health, University of Arizona, Tucson 85719, USA. mveazie@u.arizona.edu
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To determine whether heavily drinking and alcohol-dependent workers are at higher risk of occupational injury, we analyzed the nationally representative cohort of people enrolled in the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth since 1979. METHODS: This analysis was restricted to the 8569 respondents in the 1989 annual interview (age 24-32) who were employed during the 6 months before the interview. We studied occupational injuries (excluding sprains or strains) reported within 6 months of the interview in 1989 (cross-sectional analysis) and 1990 (prospective analysis). RESULTS: Among current drinkers, significant two-fold increases in the odds of injury for one or more episodes of heavy drinking were reduced to an odds ratio (OR) of 1.2 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.7, 2.1) in the cross-sectional analysis and an OR of 1.6 (CI 1.0, 2.8) in the prospective analysis after adjustment for confounding. No dose-response relationship with the frequency of heavy drinking was found. Alcohol-dependent respondents were not at higher risk of injury in the cross-sectional (OR = 1.1, CI 0.7, 1.8) or prospective (OR = 1.3,CI 0.8, 2.2) analyses after adjustment for confounding. CONCLUSIONS: For young U.S. workers, common occupational injuries (excluding sprains and strains) may not be strongly associated with alcohol dependence. Confounding by other risk factors may explain much of the association between being a heavy drinker and occupational injuries in this population.
BACKGROUND: To determine whether heavily drinking and alcohol-dependent workers are at higher risk of occupational injury, we analyzed the nationally representative cohort of people enrolled in the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth since 1979. METHODS: This analysis was restricted to the 8569 respondents in the 1989 annual interview (age 24-32) who were employed during the 6 months before the interview. We studied occupational injuries (excluding sprains or strains) reported within 6 months of the interview in 1989 (cross-sectional analysis) and 1990 (prospective analysis). RESULTS: Among current drinkers, significant two-fold increases in the odds of injury for one or more episodes of heavy drinking were reduced to an odds ratio (OR) of 1.2 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.7, 2.1) in the cross-sectional analysis and an OR of 1.6 (CI 1.0, 2.8) in the prospective analysis after adjustment for confounding. No dose-response relationship with the frequency of heavy drinking was found. Alcohol-dependent respondents were not at higher risk of injury in the cross-sectional (OR = 1.1, CI 0.7, 1.8) or prospective (OR = 1.3,CI 0.8, 2.2) analyses after adjustment for confounding. CONCLUSIONS: For young U.S. workers, common occupational injuries (excluding sprains and strains) may not be strongly associated with alcohol dependence. Confounding by other risk factors may explain much of the association between being a heavy drinker and occupational injuries in this population.
Authors: Dwayne W Jarman; Timothy S Naimi; Stephen P Pickard; Walter Randolph Daley; Anindya K De Journal: Prev Chronic Dis Date: 2007-09-15 Impact factor: 2.830