Literature DB >> 28621245

Evaluation of school teachers' sociodemographic characteristics and quality of life according to their cigarette smoking status: a cross-sectional study from the eastern Black Sea region of Turkey.

Dilek Çakmakçı Karadoğan1, Özgür Önal, Deniz Say Şahin, Sonnur Yazıcı, Yalçın Kanbay.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Smoking related health disorders are particularly common after long-term cigarette use and accordingly cumulative side effects of smoking usually do not appear in younger individuals. Therefore, for evaluating the contemporary effects of smoking in healthy individuals quality of life has become a fundamental criterion. In this study our aims are evaluating factors affecting school teachers' smoking status and comparing quality of life them according to their cigarette smoking status.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This cross-sectional study, conducted between March 1 and June 30, 2015, included all government school teachers in Hopa. A sociodemographic data form and World Health Organisation Quality of Life-bref (WHOQL-bref) questionnaire were used. Statistical analysis was performed via SPSS 20. To evaluate the reliability of the WHOQOL-bref questionnaire, Cronbach's alpha co-efficiency was calculated for each domain separately. RESULT: Statistical analysis was performed on 327 participants' data. The mean age of the teachers was 34.2 ± 8.73 and 50.2% of them were female. Most of the teachers were never smokers (67.8%) and current smokers' made up 20.1% of the population. Mean Fagerström score of current smokers was 4.1±1.96. Multinominal logistic regression analysis showed that there was a positive association between male gender and current smoking (OR= 2.25; 95% CI: 1.17-4.32; p< 0.05). Perception of quality of life and perception of health status scores were lower in the current smoker group as compared to never smokers (p< 0.05). However, other quality of life domains were not significantly different among smoking groups. Also, none of the quality of life domains differed significantly according to current smokers' nicotine dependence level.
CONCLUSIONS: This study reflected a decrease in current smoking prevalence among school teachers compared to previous years. Also, the perception of quality of life and perception of health status scores were lower in the current smoker group as compared to never smokers.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28621245

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Tuberk Toraks        ISSN: 0494-1373


  5 in total

1.  Prevalence and determinants of smoking status among university students: Artvin Çoruh University sample.

Authors:  Dilek Karadoğan; Özgür Önal; Yalçın Kanbay
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-12-10       Impact factor: 3.240

2.  National, regional, and global prevalence of cigarette smoking among women/females in the general population: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Alireza Jafari; Abdolhalim Rajabi; Mahdi Gholian-Aval; Nooshin Peyman; Mehrsadat Mahdizadeh; Hadi Tehrani
Journal:  Environ Health Prev Med       Date:  2021-01-08       Impact factor: 3.674

3.  The Association Between Smoking and Health-Related Quality of Life Among Chinese Individuals Aged 40 Years and Older: A Cross-Sectional Study.

Authors:  Xi Cheng; Chenggang Jin
Journal:  Front Public Health       Date:  2022-02-24

4.  Gender-Specific Prevalence of Risk Factors for Non-Communicable Diseases by Health Service Use among Schoolteachers in Afghanistan.

Authors:  Sharifullah Alemi; Keiko Nakamura; Ahmad Shekib Arab; Mohammad Omar Mashal; Yuri Tashiro; Kaoruko Seino; Shafiqullah Hemat
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2021-05-26       Impact factor: 3.390

5.  Demographic, Life Style and Job-Related Determinants of Quality of Life of Industrial Manufacturing Employees: An Application of Multilevel Latent Class Regression on a Large Cross-Sectional Study.

Authors:  Najmeh Rabanipour; Hamidreza Roohafza; Awat Feizi; Nizal Sarrafzadegan
Journal:  Ethiop J Health Sci       Date:  2019-01
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.