BACKGROUND: Unhealthy behaviours often occur in combination. In this study the relationship between education and lifestyle, defined as a cluster of risk behaviours, has been analysed with the purpose to assess socio-economic changes in multiple risk behaviour over time. METHODS: Cross-sectional data from the Belgian Health Interview Surveys 1997, 2001 and 2004 were analysed. This study is restricted to persons aged ≥ 15 years with information on those health behaviours and education (n = 7431, n = 8142 and n = 7459, respectively). A lifestyle index was created based on the sum of the four unhealthy behaviours: smokers vs. non-smokers, risky versus non-risky alcohol use, sedentaryness vs. physically active and poor vs. healthy diet. The lifestyle index was dichotomized as low (0-2) vs. high (3-4). For the assessment of socio-economic inequalities in multiple risk behaviour, summary measures as Odds Ratio (OR) and Relative Index of Inequality (RII) were calculated using logistic regression, stratified by sex. RESULTS: Of the adult population, 7.5% combined three to four unhealthy behaviours. Lower educated men are the most at risk. Besides, the OR among men significantly increased from 1.6 in 2001 to 3.4 in 2004 (P = 0.029). The increase of the OR among women was less pronounced. The RII, on the other hand, did not show any gradient, neither for men nor for women. CONCLUSION: Multiple risk behaviour is more common among lower educated people. An increasing polarization in socio-economic inequalities is assessed from 2001 to 2004 among men. Therefore, health promotion programmes should focus on the lower socio-economic classes and target risk behaviours simultaneously.
BACKGROUND: Unhealthy behaviours often occur in combination. In this study the relationship between education and lifestyle, defined as a cluster of risk behaviours, has been analysed with the purpose to assess socio-economic changes in multiple risk behaviour over time. METHODS: Cross-sectional data from the Belgian Health Interview Surveys 1997, 2001 and 2004 were analysed. This study is restricted to persons aged ≥ 15 years with information on those health behaviours and education (n = 7431, n = 8142 and n = 7459, respectively). A lifestyle index was created based on the sum of the four unhealthy behaviours: smokers vs. non-smokers, risky versus non-risky alcohol use, sedentaryness vs. physically active and poor vs. healthy diet. The lifestyle index was dichotomized as low (0-2) vs. high (3-4). For the assessment of socio-economic inequalities in multiple risk behaviour, summary measures as Odds Ratio (OR) and Relative Index of Inequality (RII) were calculated using logistic regression, stratified by sex. RESULTS: Of the adult population, 7.5% combined three to four unhealthy behaviours. Lower educated men are the most at risk. Besides, the OR among men significantly increased from 1.6 in 2001 to 3.4 in 2004 (P = 0.029). The increase of the OR among women was less pronounced. The RII, on the other hand, did not show any gradient, neither for men nor for women. CONCLUSION: Multiple risk behaviour is more common among lower educated people. An increasing polarization in socio-economic inequalities is assessed from 2001 to 2004 among men. Therefore, health promotion programmes should focus on the lower socio-economic classes and target risk behaviours simultaneously.
Authors: Nathalie T Burkert; Wolfgang Freidl; Johanna Muckenhuber; Willibald J Stronegger; Eva Rásky Journal: Wien Klin Wochenschr Date: 2012-04-20 Impact factor: 1.704
Authors: Marielle A Beenackers; Carlijn B M Kamphuis; Katrina Giskes; Johannes Brug; Anton E Kunst; Alex Burdorf; Frank J van Lenthe Journal: Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act Date: 2012-09-19 Impact factor: 6.457
Authors: Nick Meader; Kristelle King; Thirimon Moe-Byrne; Kath Wright; Hilary Graham; Mark Petticrew; Chris Power; Martin White; Amanda J Sowden Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2016-07-29 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Laura Tinner; Deborah Caldwell; Matthew Hickman; Georgina J MacArthur; Denise Gottfredson; Alberto Lana Perez; D Paul Moberg; David Wolfe; Rona Campbell Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2018-10-16 Impact factor: 3.295