| 1. |
- Dragano, Nico, et al.
(författare)
-
Effort-Reward Imbalance at Work and Incident Coronary Heart Disease A Multicohort Study of 90,164 Individuals
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Epidemiology. - : Lippincott Williams & Wilkins. - 1044-3983 .- 1531-5487. ; 28:4, s. 619-626
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Epidemiologic evidence for work stress as a risk factor for coronary heart disease is mostly based on a single measure of stressful work known as job strain, a combination of high demands and low job control. We examined whether a complementary stress measure that assesses an imbalance between efforts spent at work and rewards received predicted coronary heart disease.Methods: This multicohort study (the "IPD-Work" consortium) was based on harmonized individual-level data from 11 European prospective cohort studies. Stressful work in 90,164 men and women without coronary heart disease at baseline was assessed by validated effort-reward imbalance and job strain questionnaires. We defined incident coronary heart disease as the first nonfatal myocardial infarction or coronary death. Study-specific estimates were pooled by random effects meta-analysis.Results: At baseline, 31.7% of study members reported effort-reward imbalance at work and 15.9% reported job strain. During a mean follow-up of 9.8 years, 1,078 coronary events were recorded. After adjustment for potential confounders, a hazard ratio of 1.16 (95% confidence interval, 1.00-1.35) was observed for effort-reward imbalance compared with no imbalance. The hazard ratio was 1.16 (1.01-1.34) for having either effort-reward imbalance or job strain and 1.41 (1.12-1.76) for having both these stressors compared to having neither effort-reward imbalance nor job strain.Conclusions: Individuals with effort-reward imbalance at work have an increased risk of coronary heart disease, and this appears to be independent of job strain experienced. These findings support expanding focus beyond just job strain in future research on work stress.
|
|
| 2. |
- Heikkila, Katriina, et al.
(författare)
-
Job Strain and Alcohol Intake : A Collaborative Meta-Analysis of Individual-Participant Data from 140 000 Men and Women
- 2012
-
Ingår i: PLOS ONE. - : Public Library of Science (PLoS). - 1932-6203. ; 7:7, s. Art. no. e40101-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: The relationship between work-related stress and alcohol intake is uncertain. In order to add to the thus far inconsistent evidence from relatively small studies, we conducted individual-participant meta-analyses of the association between work-related stress (operationalised as self-reported job strain) and alcohol intake. Methodology and Principal Findings: We analysed cross-sectional data from 12 European studies (n = 142 140) and longitudinal data from four studies (n = 48 646). Job strain and alcohol intake were self-reported. Job strain was analysed as a binary variable (strain vs. no strain). Alcohol intake was harmonised into the following categories: none, moderate (women: 1-14, men: 1-21 drinks/week), intermediate (women: 15-20, men: 22-27 drinks/week) and heavy (women: > 20, men: > 27 drinks/week). Cross-sectional associations were modelled using logistic regression and the results pooled in random effects meta-analyses. Longitudinal associations were examined using mixed effects logistic and modified Poisson regression. Compared to moderate drinkers, non-drinkers and (random effects odds ratio (OR): 1.10, 95% CI: 1.05, 1.14) and heavy drinkers (OR: 1.12, 95% CI: 1.00, 1.26) had higher odds of job strain. Intermediate drinkers, on the other hand, had lower odds of job strain (OR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.86, 0.99). We found no clear evidence for longitudinal associations between job strain and alcohol intake. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that compared to moderate drinkers, non-drinkers and heavy drinkers are more likely and intermediate drinkers less likely to report work-related stress.
|
|
| 3. |
- Heikkila, Katriina, et al.
(författare)
-
Job Strain and Tobacco Smoking : An Individual-Participant Data Meta-Analysis of 166 130 Adults in 15 European Studies
- 2012
-
Ingår i: PLOS ONE. - : Public Library of Science (PLoS). - 1932-6203. ; 7:7
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Tobacco smoking is a major contributor to the public health burden and healthcare costs worldwide, but the determinants of smoking behaviours are poorly understood. We conducted a large individual-participant meta-analysis to examine the extent to which work-related stress, operationalised as job strain, is associated with tobacco smoking in working adults. Methodology and Principal Findings: We analysed cross-sectional data from 15 European studies comprising 166 130 participants. Longitudinal data from six studies were used. Job strain and smoking were self-reported. Smoking was harmonised into three categories never, ex- and current. We modelled the cross-sectional associations using logistic regression and the results pooled in random effects meta-analyses. Mixed effects logistic regression was used to examine longitudinal associations. Of the 166 130 participants, 17% reported job strain, 42% were never smokers, 33% ex-smokers and 25% current smokers. In the analyses of the cross-sectional data, current smokers had higher odds of job strain than never-smokers (age, sex and socioeconomic position-adjusted odds ratio: 1.11, 95% confidence interval: 1.03, 1.18). Current smokers with job strain smoked, on average, three cigarettes per week more than current smokers without job strain. In the analyses of longitudinal data (1 to 9 years of follow-up), there was no clear evidence for longitudinal associations between job strain and taking up or quitting smoking. Conclusions: Our findings show that smokers are slightly more likely than non-smokers to report work-related stress. In addition, smokers who reported work stress smoked, on average, slightly more cigarettes than stress-free smokers.
|
|
| 4. |
- Heikkila, Katriina, et al.
(författare)
-
Long working hours and cancer risk : a multi-cohort study
- 2016
-
Ingår i: British Journal of Cancer. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0007-0920 .- 1532-1827. ; 114, s. 813-818
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Working longer than the maximum recommended hours is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease, but the relationship of excess working hours with incident cancer is unclear.METHODS: This multi-cohort study examined the association between working hours and cancer risk in 116 462 men and women who were free of cancer at baseline. Incident cancers were ascertained from national cancer, hospitalisation and death registers; weekly working hours were self-reported.RESULTS: During median follow-up of 10.8 years, 4371 participants developed cancer (n colorectal cancer: 393; n lung cancer: 247; n breast cancer: 833; and n prostate cancer: 534). We found no clear evidence for an association between working hours and the overall cancer risk. Working hours were also unrelated the risk of incident colorectal, lung or prostate cancers. Working ⩾55 h per week was associated with 1.60-fold (95% confidence interval 1.12-2.29) increase in female breast cancer risk independently of age, socioeconomic position, shift- and night-time work and lifestyle factors, but this observation may have been influenced by residual confounding from parity.CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that working long hours is unrelated to the overall cancer risk or the risk of lung, colorectal or prostate cancers. The observed association with breast cancer would warrant further research.
|
|
| 5. |
- Siegrist, Johannes, et al.
(författare)
-
Validating abbreviated measures of effort-reward imbalance at work in European cohort studies : the IPD-Work consortium
- 2014
-
Ingår i: International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0340-0131 .- 1432-1246. ; 87:3, s. 249-256
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Effort-reward imbalance (ERI) is an established conceptualisation of work stress. Although a validated effort-reward questionnaire is available for public use, many epidemiological studies adopt shortened scales and proxy measures. To examine the agreement between different abbreviated measures and the original instrument, we compared different versions of the effort-reward scales available in 15 European cohort studies participating in the IPD-Work (Individual-participant-data meta-analysis in working populations) consortium. Five of the 15 studies provide information on the original ('complete') scales measuring 'effort' and 'reward', whereas the 10 remaining studies used 'partial' scales. To compare different versions of the ERI scales, we analyse individual-level data from 31,790 participants from the five studies with complete scales. Pearson's correlation between partial and complete scales was very high in case of 'effort' (where 2 out of 3 items were used) and very high or high in case of 'reward', if at least 4 items (out of 7) were included. Reward scales composed of 3 items revealed good to satisfactory agreement, and in one case, a reward scale consisting of 2 items only demonstrated a modest, but still acceptable degree of agreement. Sensitivity and specificity of a composite measure, the ratio of effort and reward, comparing partial versus complete scales ranged between 59-93 and 85-99 %, respectively. Complete and partial scales were strongly associated with poor self-rated health. Our results support the notion that short proxy measures or partial versions of the original scales can be used to assess effort-reward imbalance.
|
|
