PURPOSE: Hypertension is one of the most relevant risk factors for cardiovascular disease; however, little is known about differences in hypertension by occupation. The aim of this study was to explore the association between occupational group and prevalent hypertension. METHODS: Cross-sectional data of the CARLA study were used, a representative sample of an East German population aged 45-83. Job titles of the current or last held occupation of 967 men and 808 women were coded using the German classification of occupation. Hypertension was defined as blood pressure of ≥140 mmHg (systolic), ≥90 mmHg (diastolic) or use of antihypertensives. Sex-stratified, age-adjusted prevalence risk ratios (PR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for 31 occupational groups. RESULTS: Hypertension was prevalent in 79% of the population. In men, highest age-adjusted prevalence ratios were observed in metal-processing workers, carpenters/painters, and electricians with PRs of 1.31 (CI 1.04-1.65), 1.28 (CI 1.00-1.64), and 1.21 (0.95-1.53), respectively, compared to office clerks. In women, highest PRs were found in technicians/forewomen, scrutinisers/storekeepers, and food-processing occupations with PR 1.28 (1.09-1.49), 1.23 (0.99-1.51), and 1.22 (1.01-1.48), respectively. Adjustment for education, smoking, body mass index, and current work hours did not fully explain occupational differences. Excluding currently non-working subjects lead to decreased PRs in men and to increased PR in women. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in the prevalences of hypertension by occupational group were only partly explained by conventional risk factors and may require workplace interventions targeted at high-risk occupations. Longitudinal data with large cohorts and work-related exposure assessment are needed to confirm a temporal relationship between occupation and incident hypertension.
PURPOSE:Hypertension is one of the most relevant risk factors for cardiovascular disease; however, little is known about differences in hypertension by occupation. The aim of this study was to explore the association between occupational group and prevalent hypertension. METHODS: Cross-sectional data of the CARLA study were used, a representative sample of an East German population aged 45-83. Job titles of the current or last held occupation of 967 men and 808 women were coded using the German classification of occupation. Hypertension was defined as blood pressure of ≥140 mmHg (systolic), ≥90 mmHg (diastolic) or use of antihypertensives. Sex-stratified, age-adjusted prevalence risk ratios (PR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for 31 occupational groups. RESULTS:Hypertension was prevalent in 79% of the population. In men, highest age-adjusted prevalence ratios were observed in metal-processing workers, carpenters/painters, and electricians with PRs of 1.31 (CI 1.04-1.65), 1.28 (CI 1.00-1.64), and 1.21 (0.95-1.53), respectively, compared to office clerks. In women, highest PRs were found in technicians/forewomen, scrutinisers/storekeepers, and food-processing occupations with PR 1.28 (1.09-1.49), 1.23 (0.99-1.51), and 1.22 (1.01-1.48), respectively. Adjustment for education, smoking, body mass index, and current work hours did not fully explain occupational differences. Excluding currently non-working subjects lead to decreased PRs in men and to increased PR in women. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in the prevalences of hypertension by occupational group were only partly explained by conventional risk factors and may require workplace interventions targeted at high-risk occupations. Longitudinal data with large cohorts and work-related exposure assessment are needed to confirm a temporal relationship between occupation and incident hypertension.
Authors: Andreas Seidler; Petra Geller; Albert Nienhaus; Tanja Bernhardt; Ingeburg Ruppe; Siegfried Eggert; Maila Hietanen; Timo Kauppinen; Lutz Frölich Journal: Occup Environ Med Date: 2006-10-16 Impact factor: 4.402
Authors: Katharina Wolf-Maier; Richard S Cooper; José R Banegas; Simona Giampaoli; Hans-Werner Hense; Michel Joffres; Mika Kastarinen; Neil Poulter; Paola Primatesta; Fernando Rodríguez-Artalejo; Birgitta Stegmayr; Michael Thamm; Jaakko Tuomilehto; Diego Vanuzzo; Fenicia Vescio Journal: JAMA Date: 2003-05-14 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Katharina Wolf-Maier; Richard S Cooper; Holly Kramer; José R Banegas; Simona Giampaoli; Michel R Joffres; Neil Poulter; Paola Primatesta; Birgitta Stegmayr; Michael Thamm Journal: Hypertension Date: 2003-11-24 Impact factor: 10.190
Authors: K Steenland; L Fine; K Belkić; P Landsbergis; P Schnall; D Baker; T Theorell; J Siegrist; R Peter; R Karasek; M Marmot; C Brisson; F Tüchsen Journal: Occup Med Date: 2000 Jan-Mar
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: Michael J Kosnett; Richard P Wedeen; Stephen J Rothenberg; Karen L Hipkins; Barbara L Materna; Brian S Schwartz; Howard Hu; Alan Woolf Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 2006-12-22 Impact factor: 9.031
Authors: Paul A Landsbergis; Ana V Diez-Roux; Kaori Fujishiro; Sherry Baron; Joel D Kaufman; John D Meyer; George Koutsouras; Daichi Shimbo; Sandi Shrager; Karen Hinckley Stukovsky; Moyses Szklo Journal: J Occup Environ Med Date: 2015-11 Impact factor: 2.162
Authors: Daniel Väisänen; Lena V Kallings; Gunnar Andersson; Peter Wallin; Erik Hemmingsson; Elin Ekblom-Bak Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2020-11-04 Impact factor: 3.295