Mette Korshøj1,2, Els Clays3, Mark Lidegaard4, Jørgen H Skotte4, Andreas Holtermann4,5, Peter Krustrup6,7, Karen Søgaard5. 1. The National Research Centre for the Working Environment, Lersø Parkallé 105, 2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark. mkl@nrcwe.dk. 2. Department of Nutrition, Exercise and Sports, Copenhagen Centre for Team Sport and Health, University of Copenhagen, Nørre Allé 51, 2200, Copenhagen N, Denmark. mkl@nrcwe.dk. 3. Department of Public Health, Ghent University, De Pintelaan 185, 9000, Ghent, Belgium. 4. The National Research Centre for the Working Environment, Lersø Parkallé 105, 2100, Copenhagen Ø, Denmark. 5. Institute of Sports Science and Clinical Biomechanics, University of Southern Denmark, Campusvej 55, 5230, Odense M, Denmark. 6. Department of Nutrition, Exercise and Sports, Copenhagen Centre for Team Sport and Health, University of Copenhagen, Nørre Allé 51, 2200, Copenhagen N, Denmark. 7. Sport and Health Sciences, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Exeter, St. Luke's Campus, Exeter, UK.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Cardiovascular disease is prevalent among workers with high levels of occupational physical activity. The increased risk may be due to a high relative aerobic workload, possibly leading to increased blood pressure. However, studies investigating the relation between relative aerobic workload and ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) are lacking. The aim was to explore the relationship between objectively measured relative aerobic workload and ABP. METHODS: A total of 116 cleaners aged 18-65 years were included after informed consent was obtained. A portable device (Spacelabs 90217) was mounted for 24-h measurements of ABP, and an Actiheart was mounted for 24-h heart rate measurements to calculate relative aerobic workload as percentage of relative heart rate reserve. A repeated-measure multi-adjusted mixed model was applied for analysis. RESULTS: A fully adjusted mixed model of measurements throughout the day showed significant positive relations (p < 0.001): a 1% increase in mean relative aerobic workload was associated with an increase of 0.42 ± 0.05 mmHg (95% CI 0.32-0.52 mmHg) in systolic ABP and 0.30 ± 0.04 mmHg (95% CI 0.22-0.38 mmHg) in diastolic ABP. Correlations between relative aerobic workload and ABP were significant. CONCLUSIONS: Because workers may have an elevated relative aerobic workload for several hours each working day, this relationship may elucidate a mechanism behind the increased risk for cardiovascular disease among workers exposed to high levels of occupational physical activity.
PURPOSE:Cardiovascular disease is prevalent among workers with high levels of occupational physical activity. The increased risk may be due to a high relative aerobic workload, possibly leading to increased blood pressure. However, studies investigating the relation between relative aerobic workload and ambulatory blood pressure (ABP) are lacking. The aim was to explore the relationship between objectively measured relative aerobic workload and ABP. METHODS: A total of 116 cleaners aged 18-65 years were included after informed consent was obtained. A portable device (Spacelabs 90217) was mounted for 24-h measurements of ABP, and an Actiheart was mounted for 24-h heart rate measurements to calculate relative aerobic workload as percentage of relative heart rate reserve. A repeated-measure multi-adjusted mixed model was applied for analysis. RESULTS: A fully adjusted mixed model of measurements throughout the day showed significant positive relations (p < 0.001): a 1% increase in mean relative aerobic workload was associated with an increase of 0.42 ± 0.05 mmHg (95% CI 0.32-0.52 mmHg) in systolic ABP and 0.30 ± 0.04 mmHg (95% CI 0.22-0.38 mmHg) in diastolic ABP. Correlations between relative aerobic workload and ABP were significant. CONCLUSIONS: Because workers may have an elevated relative aerobic workload for several hours each working day, this relationship may elucidate a mechanism behind the increased risk for cardiovascular disease among workers exposed to high levels of occupational physical activity.
Authors: Andreas Holtermann; Hermann Burr; Jørgen V Hansen; Niklas Krause; Karen Søgaard; Ole S Mortensen Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2011-06-22 Impact factor: 3.015
Authors: Patricia M Kearney; Megan Whelton; Kristi Reynolds; Paul Muntner; Paul K Whelton; Jiang He Journal: Lancet Date: 2005 Jan 15-21 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Els Clays; Francoise Leynen; Dirk De Bacquer; Marcel Kornitzer; France Kittel; Robert Karasek; Guy De Backer Journal: J Occup Environ Med Date: 2007-04 Impact factor: 2.162
Authors: Els Clays; Dirk De Bacquer; Koen Van Herck; Guy De Backer; France Kittel; Andreas Holtermann Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2012-11-20 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Tuija M Mikkola; Mikaela B von Bonsdorff; Minna K Salonen; Hannu Kautiainen; Leena Ala-Mursula; Svetlana Solovieva; Eira Viikari-Juntura; Johan G Eriksson Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2019-05-16 Impact factor: 2.692
Authors: Mette Korshøj; Charlotte Lund Rasmussen; Tatiana de Oliveira Sato; Andreas Holtermann; David Hallman Journal: Scand J Work Environ Health Date: 2021-04-30 Impact factor: 5.024