| Literature DB >> 31213038 |
Lilian Monteiro Ferrari Viterbo1,2, Maria Alzira Pimenta Dinis3, Diogo Guedes Vidal4,5, André Santana Costa6.
Abstract
This study intends to analyse the behaviour of epidemiological variables of workers in anoilindustry of Bahia, Brazil, before and after implementation of interdisciplinary practices in occupational health assessments between 2006 and 2015. This is a retrospective longitudinal study carried out in two time periods. Data were collected from the workers electronic medical record and time trends were analysed before (2006-2010) and after (2011-2015) the implementation of the interdisciplinary practices focusing on health promotion. The data were complementarily compared to a control group from the same industry.A statistically significant reduction for data on the number of smokers, periodontal disease and of days away from work was obtained. A significant increase in the number of physically active subjects wasalso observed. Whilenot statistically significant, a reduction in the number of workers with obesity and overweight, with caries and altered glycemia, was identified. Coronary risk and high blood pressure indicators have shown aggravation. It can be concluded that an interdisciplinary health approach during the annual occupational assessments, with action directed to the population needs, can be associated with the improvement of the health indicators assessed, contributing to increased worker productivity in the oil industry.Entities:
Keywords: chronic noncommunicable diseases (CNCDs); health promotion; interdisciplinary communication; oil industry; worker’s health
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31213038 PMCID: PMC6617393 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph16122148
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Sample characterization by sex before and after the implementation of the health intervention program.
| Stage | Year | Control Group | Test Group | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total ( | Male (%) | Female (%) | Total ( | Male (%) | Female (%) | ||
| Before Intervention (BI) | 2006 | 39,204 | 87.7 | 12.3 | 1574 | 89.3 | 10.7 |
| 2007 | 47,152 | 86.5 | 13.5 | 1727 | 88.9 | 11.1 | |
| 2008 | 49,140 | 86.2 | 13.8 | 1724 | 88.9 | 11.1 | |
| 2009 | 54,269 | 85.7 | 14.3 | 1792 | 88.9 | 11.1 | |
| 2010 | 54,537 | 85.8 | 14.2 | 1778 | 88.6 | 11.4 | |
| After Intervention (AF) | 2011 | 56,645 | 85.7 | 14.3 | 1810 | 88.5 | 11.5 |
| 2012 | 59,836 | 85.4 | 14.7 | 1831 | 88.7 | 11.3 | |
| 2013 | 61,492 | 85.1 | 14.9 | 1805 | 88.4 | 11.6 | |
| 2014 | 60,753 | 85.1 | 14.9 | 1784 | 88.5 | 11.5 | |
| 2015 | 59,086 | 85.0 | 14.9 | 1591 | 88.2 | 11.8 | |
Indicators’ descriptive statistics before and after the implementation of the health intervention program.
| Indicator | Stage | Control Group | Test Group | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean ± Std. | Min–Max | Mean ± Std. | Min–Max | ||
| Smokers (%) | BI | 8.9 ± 0.01 | 7.4–10.9 | 8.3 ± 0.01 | 7.1–9.9 |
| AF | 5.4 ± 0.01 | 4.3–6.8 | 4.9 ± 0.01 | 3.8–6.6 | |
| Physically Active (%) | BI | 24.4 ± 0.03 | 21.5–27.6 | 23.6 ± 0.02 | 21.4–25.4 |
| AF | 29.1 ± 0.01 | 28.0–30.2 | 31.0 ± 0.03 | 26.6–33.8 | |
| Coronary Risk (%) | BI | 4.2 ± 0.00 | 4.1–4.3 | 5.8 ± 0.01 | 3.9–7.0 |
| AF | 3.8 ± 0.01 | 3.2–4.3 | 6.0 ± 0.00 | 4.9–7.0 | |
| Periodontal Disease (%) | BI | 5.3 ± 0.00 | 4.8–5.6 | 10.2 ± 0.01 | 8.1–11.5 |
| AF | 3.6 ± 0.01 | 2.8–4.6 | 6.4 ± 0.02 | 4.0–9.1 | |
| Obesity and Overweight (%) | BI | 69.2 ± 0.04 | 65.5–75.0 | 71.5 ± 0.02 | 69.5–74.7 |
| AF | 65.2 ± 0.03 | 61.2–68.1 | 69.8 ± 0.04 | 63.6–72.9 | |
| Caries (%) | BI | 0.9 ± 0.74 | 0.02–1.73 | 2.3 ± 2.16 | 0.02–4.89 |
| AF | 1.6 ± 0.30 | 1.27–2.02 | 3.3 ± 1.41 | 1.79–5.35 | |
| High Blood Pressure (%) | BI | 13.1 ± 0.69 | 12.3–13.9 | 19.8 ± 3.19 | 14.8–22.2 |
| AF | 12.4 ± 1.07 | 11.2–13.7 | 20.4 ± 0.80 | 19.5–21.7 | |
| High Glycaemia (%) | BI | 17.3 ± 0.77 | 16.1–18.0 | 22.7 ± 5.31 | 17.3–29.7 |
| AF | 16.0 ± 1.74 | 13.5–17.5 | 22.1 ± 3.62 | 17.2–25.9 | |
| Days Away from Work (No) | BI | 6.4 ± 0.48 | 5.85–6.83 | 8.2 ± 0.23 | 7.95–8.55 |
| AF | 6.7 ± 0.16 | 6.51–6.83 | 6.7 ± 0.48 | 6.21–7.39 | |
Note: (BI) Before Intervention; (AF) After Intervention.
Mean comparison within and among control and test groups.
| Indicators | Stage | Control Group ( | Test Group ( | Percent Variation (%) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Control Group | Test Group | ||||||
| Smokers | BI |
|
|
|
| −0.61 | −0.60 |
| AF | 5.42 | 4.94 | |||||
| BI | 0.22 | ||||||
| AF | 0.26 | ||||||
| Physically Active | BI | 24.41 |
| 23.63 |
| 0.40 | 0.51 |
| AF | 29.12 | 31.04 | |||||
| BI | 0.30 | ||||||
| AF | 0.10 | ||||||
| Coronary Risk | BI | 4.21 | 0.08 | 5.83 | 0.45 | −0.27 | 0.30 |
| AF | 3.82 | 6.04 | |||||
| BI |
| ||||||
| AF |
| ||||||
| Periodontal Disease | BI | 5.31 |
| 10.23 |
| −0.42 | −0.62 |
| AF | 3.62 | 6.44 | |||||
| BI |
| ||||||
| AF |
| ||||||
| Obesity and Overweight | BI | 69.21 |
| 71.53 | 0.20 | −0.17 | −0.07 |
| AF | 65.22 | 69.84 | |||||
| BI | 0.13 | ||||||
| AF |
| ||||||
| Caries | BI | 0.91 |
| 2.33 | 0.19 | 0.06 | −0.50 |
| AF | 1.62 | 3.33 | |||||
| BI | 0.10 | ||||||
| AF |
| ||||||
| High Blood Pressure | BI | 13.11 | 0.22 | 19.83 | 0.37 | −0.09 | 0.38 |
| AF | 12.42 | 20.43 | |||||
| BI |
| ||||||
| AF |
| ||||||
| High Glycaemia | BI | 17.31 | 0.09 | 22.73 | 0.38 | −0.23 | −0.35 |
| AF | 16.02 | 22.14 | |||||
| BI |
| ||||||
| AF |
| ||||||
| Days Away from Work | BI | 6.41 | 0.18 | 8.23 |
| 0.10 | −0.27 |
| AF | 6.72 | 6.74 | |||||
| BI |
| ||||||
| AF | 0.45 | ||||||
Note: (BI) Before Intervention; (AF) After Intervention. Significant differences are presented in bold (p<0.05). a control group and b test group intergroup means comparison; 1AI and 2 BI intragroup comparison (control group); 3AI and 4BI intragroup comparison (test group); *independent sample t-test; ** paired sample t-test.
Percent variation comparison between the test group and the Brazilian workers (2006–2015).
| Indicator (%) | Test Group | Brazil |
|---|---|---|
| Smokers | −0.60 | −0.33 |
| Physically Active | 0.51 | 0.24 |
| Obesity and Overweight | −0.07 | 1.28 |
| High Blood Pressure | 0.38 | 0.22 |
| High Glycaemia | −0.35 | 0.23 |
Figure 1Group indicators corresponding to significant statistical differences after health intervention. Note: (BI) Before Intervention; (AF) After Intervention. Significant differences are presented in bold (p < 0.05).
Comparative analysis based on the goals of the Strategic Action Plan for Coping with CNCDs in Brazil from 2011 to 2022. (Results with the best performance are in bold).
| Brazil CNCDsPlan Goals (2011–2022) | Baseline Value (2010) | Latest Result (2017) | Evolution | Group |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Smoking prevalence reduction by 30 % | 14.1 | 10.1 | −28 | Brazil |
| 7.4 | 3.5 | −53 | Control group | |
| 7.1 | 3.1 |
| Test group | |
| Increase in the prevalence of physical activity practice in free time by 10% | 30.1 | 37 | 23 | Brazil |
| 27.6 | 30.8 | 11 | Control group | |
| 25.4 | 38.1 |
| Test group | |
| Control of the increase in obesity in adults % | 15.1 | 18.9 | 25 | Brazil |
| 22.03 | 24.04 | 9 | Control group | |
| 24.33 | 24.61 |
| Test group |
Test group indicators’ assessment after health intervention (2006–2015).
| Indicator | Polarity | Trend | Assessment |
|---|---|---|---|
| Smokers | − | ↓ | Improvement |
| Physically Active | + | ↑ | Improvement |
| Coronary Risk | − | ↑ | Aggravation |
| Periodontal Disease | − | ↓ | Improvement |
| Obesity and Overweight | − | ↓ | Improvement |
| Caries | − | ↓ | Improvement |
| High Blood Pressure | − | ↑ | Aggravation |
| High Glycaemia | − | ↓ | Improvement |
| Days Away from Work | − | ↓ | Improvement |
Note: ↑ – increased; ↓ – decreased.
Figure 2Prediction trend lines corresponding to indicators in which no improvements were observed (a) evolution of the high blood pressure indicator, (b) evolution of the coronary risk indicator.