Brenden B Ronna1, Matthew S Thiese, Ulrike Ott, Atim Effiong, Maureen Murtaugh, Jay Kapellusch, Arun Garg, Kurt Hegmann. 1. Rocky Mountain Center for Occupational and Environmental Health, Department of Family & Preventive Medicine, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City (Mr Ronna, Drs Thiese, Ott, Effiong, Murtaugh, Hegmann), and Department of Industrial & Manufacturing Engineering, Center for Ergonomics, University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee (Drs Kapellusch, Garg).
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: This study assesses relationships between the Framingham cardiovascular disease risk (CVD risk) score and prevalence of US Department of Transportation (DOT)-reportable crashes in commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers, after controlling for potential confounders. METHODS: Data were analyzed from CMV drivers (N = 797) in a large cross-sectional study. CVD risk was calculated for each driver. Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) between CVD risk and DOT-reportable crashes were calculated. RESULTS: Drivers in the two highest CVD risk groups had significantly higher likelihood of crash (OR = 2.08, 95% CI = 1.20 to 3.63 and OR = 1.99, 95% CI = 1.05 to 3.77, respectively) after adjusting for confounders. There was a significant trend of increasing prevalence of crashes with an increasing CVD risk score (P = 0.0298). CONCLUSION: Drivers with a high CVD risk had a higher likelihood of a crash after controlling for confounders.
OBJECTIVE: This study assesses relationships between the Framingham cardiovascular disease risk (CVD risk) score and prevalence of US Department of Transportation (DOT)-reportable crashes in commercial motor vehicle (CMV) drivers, after controlling for potential confounders. METHODS: Data were analyzed from CMV drivers (N = 797) in a large cross-sectional study. CVD risk was calculated for each driver. Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) between CVD risk and DOT-reportable crashes were calculated. RESULTS: Drivers in the two highest CVD risk groups had significantly higher likelihood of crash (OR = 2.08, 95% CI = 1.20 to 3.63 and OR = 1.99, 95% CI = 1.05 to 3.77, respectively) after adjusting for confounders. There was a significant trend of increasing prevalence of crashes with an increasing CVD risk score (P = 0.0298). CONCLUSION: Drivers with a high CVD risk had a higher likelihood of a crash after controlling for confounders.
Authors: Matthew S Thiese; Ulrike Ott; Riann Robbins; Atim Effiong; Maureen Murtaugh; Melissa R Lemke; Gwen Deckow-Schaefer; Jay Kapellusch; Eric Wood; Deborah Passey; Natalie Hartenbaum; Arun Garg; Kurt T Hegmann Journal: J Occup Environ Med Date: 2015-10 Impact factor: 2.162
Authors: W Karl Sieber; Cynthia F Robinson; Jan Birdsey; Guang X Chen; Edward M Hitchcock; Jennifer E Lincoln; Akinori Nakata; Marie H Sweeney Journal: Am J Ind Med Date: 2014-01-04 Impact factor: 2.214
Authors: Matthew S Thiese; Gary Moffitt; Richard J Hanowski; Stefanos N Kales; Richard J Porter; Kurt T Hegmann Journal: J Occup Environ Med Date: 2015-06 Impact factor: 2.162
Authors: M S Thiese; A C Effiong; U Ott; D G Passey; Z C Arnold; B B Ronna; P A Muthe; E M Wood; M A Murtaugh Journal: Int J Occup Environ Med Date: 2015-04
Authors: Matthew S Thiese; Richard J Hanowski; Stefanos N Kales; Richard J Porter; Gary Moffitt; Nan Hu; Kurt T Hegmann Journal: J Occup Environ Med Date: 2017-02 Impact factor: 2.162
Authors: Onwuka Okorie; Matthew S Thiese; Maureen A Murtaugh; Xiaoming Sheng; Rodney Handy; Kurt Hegmann Journal: J Occup Environ Med Date: 2019-11 Impact factor: 2.162
Authors: Evelyn Vingilis; Doug Beirness; Paul Boase; Patrick Byrne; Jennifer Johnson; Brian Jonah; Robert E Mann; Mark J Rapoport; Jane Seeley; Christine M Wickens; David L Wiesenthal Journal: Accid Anal Prev Date: 2020-07-16
Authors: Caryn van Vreden; Ting Xia; Alex Collie; Elizabeth Pritchard; Sharon Newnam; Dan I Lubman; Abilio de Almeida Neto; Ross Iles Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2022-03-08 Impact factor: 3.295