H Kuper1, A Singh-Manoux, J Siegrist, M Marmot. 1. International Centre for Health and Society, Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, University College London, 1-19 Torrington Place, London WC1E 6BT, UK. hannahk@public-health.ucl.ac.uk
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A deleterious psychosocial work environment, as defined by high efforts expended in relation to few rewards reaped, is hypothesised to increase the risk of future poor health outcomes. AIMS: To test this hypothesis within a cohort of London based civil servants. METHODS: Effort-reward imbalance (ERI) was measured among 6895 male and 3413 female civil servants aged 35-55 during the first phase of the Whitehall II study (1985-88). Participants were followed until the end of phase 5 (1997-2000), with a mean length of follow up of 11 years. Baseline ERI was used to predict incident validated coronary heart disease (CHD) events during follow up and poor mental and physical functioning at phase 5. RESULTS: A high ratio of efforts in relation to rewards was related to an increased incidence of all CHD (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.36, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.65) and fatal CHD/non-fatal myocardial infarction (HR = 1.28, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.84) during follow up, as well as poor physical (odds ratio (OR) = 1.47, 95% CI 1.24 to 1.74) and mental (OR = 2.24, 95% CI 1.89 to 2.65) functioning at phase 5, net of employment grade. A one item measure of high intrinsic effort also significantly increased the risk of these health outcomes, net of grade. ERI may be particularly deleterious with respect to CHD risk among those with low social support at work or in the lowest employment grades. DISCUSSION: Within the Whitehall II study, a ratio of high efforts to rewards predicted higher risk of CHD and poor physical and mental health functioning during follow up. Although the increased risk associated with ERI was relatively small, as ERI is common it could be of considerable public health importance.
BACKGROUND: A deleterious psychosocial work environment, as defined by high efforts expended in relation to few rewards reaped, is hypothesised to increase the risk of future poor health outcomes. AIMS: To test this hypothesis within a cohort of London based civil servants. METHODS: Effort-reward imbalance (ERI) was measured among 6895 male and 3413 female civil servants aged 35-55 during the first phase of the Whitehall II study (1985-88). Participants were followed until the end of phase 5 (1997-2000), with a mean length of follow up of 11 years. Baseline ERI was used to predict incident validated coronary heart disease (CHD) events during follow up and poor mental and physical functioning at phase 5. RESULTS: A high ratio of efforts in relation to rewards was related to an increased incidence of all CHD (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.36, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.65) and fatal CHD/non-fatal myocardial infarction (HR = 1.28, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.84) during follow up, as well as poor physical (odds ratio (OR) = 1.47, 95% CI 1.24 to 1.74) and mental (OR = 2.24, 95% CI 1.89 to 2.65) functioning at phase 5, net of employment grade. A one item measure of high intrinsic effort also significantly increased the risk of these health outcomes, net of grade. ERI may be particularly deleterious with respect to CHD risk among those with low social support at work or in the lowest employment grades. DISCUSSION: Within the Whitehall II study, a ratio of high efforts to rewards predicted higher risk of CHD and poor physical and mental health functioning during follow up. Although the increased risk associated with ERI was relatively small, as ERI is common it could be of considerable public health importance.
Authors: M G Marmot; G D Smith; S Stansfeld; C Patel; F North; J Head; I White; E Brunner; A Feeney Journal: Lancet Date: 1991-06-08 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Barbara Buddeberg-Fischer; Richard Klaghofer; Martina Stamm; Johannes Siegrist; Claus Buddeberg Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2008-02-12 Impact factor: 3.015
Authors: BongKyoo Choi; Sangbaek Ko; Paul Landsbergis; Marnie Dobson; Arturo Juárez Garcia; Peter Schnall; Dean Baker Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2013-10-05 Impact factor: 3.015
Authors: Burkhard Schmidt; Adrian Loerbroks; Raphael M Herr; Mark G Wilson; Marc N Jarczok; David Litaker; Daniel Mauss; Jos A Bosch; Joachim E Fischer Journal: Int J Behav Med Date: 2014
Authors: Inge Kirchberger; Katrin Burkhardt; Margit Heier; Christian Thilo; Christine Meisinger Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2019-09-20 Impact factor: 4.147