Cardio-cerebrovascular diseases (CVDs) are the most common cause of death worldwide. Various CVD risk assessment tools have been developed. In South Korea, the Korea Occupational Safety & Health Agency (KOSHA) and the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) have provided CVD risk assessments with health checkups. Since 2018, the KOSHA guide has stated that NHIS CVD risk assessment tool could be used as an alternative of KOSHA assessment tool for evaluating CVD risk of workers. The objective of this study was to determine the correlation and agreement between the KOSHA and the NHIS CVD risk assessment tools.

Subjects of this study were 17,485 examinees aged 20 to 64 years who had undergone medical examinations from January 2021 to December 2021 at a general hospital. We classified subjects into low-risk, moderate-risk, high-risk, and highest-risk groups according to KOSHA and NHIS’s CVD risk assessment tools. We then compared them with cross-analysis, Spearman correlation analysis, and linearly weighted kappa coefficient.

The correlation between KOSHA and NHIS tools was statistically significant (p-value < 0.001), with a correlation coefficient of 0.403 and a kappa coefficient of 0.203. When we compared risk group distribution using KOSHA and NHIS tools, CVD risk of 6,498 (37.1%) participants showed a concordance. Compared to the NHIS tool, the KOSHA tool classified 9,908 (56.7%) participants into a lower risk category and 1,079 (6.2%) participants into a higher risk category.

In this study, KOSHA and NHIS tools showed a moderate correlation with a fair agreement. The NHIS tool showed a tendency to classify participants to higher CVD risk group than the KOSHA tool. To prevent CVD more effectively, a higher estimation tool among verified CVD risk assessment methods should be selected and managements such as early intervention and treatment of risk factors should be performed targeting the high-risk group.

Although working hours have decreased in Korea, they are still high compared to that of other countries. In Korea, cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases (CCVDs) related to overwork in Korea continually occur, and the social burden from overwork is estimated to be high. This study investigated the amendment of regulations affecting the approval rate of occupational CCVDs.

The change in approval rate of occupational CCVDs and related regulations were investigated using the Act and public notice on the standards for recognition of occupational CCVDs and the yearbooks of the Ministry of Employment and Labor. The CCVD mortality was estimated using data on the number of deaths according to the cause of death, the number of employed people, and resident registration population aged 15–64 years. The cumulative mortality of CCVDs was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

Since the establishment of the standards for recognition in Korea in 1982, the scope of occupational diseases has been expanded to include intracerebral hemorrhage, subarachnoid hemorrhage, cerebral infarction, myocardial infarction, and aortic dissection. In 2013, the concept of working hours was introduced in chronic overwork. The approval rate of occupational CCVDs was 44.7% in 2006, which decreased to 12.9% in 2011. After the improvement of related regulations, the approval rate increased to 41.3% in 2018. From 2000 to 2017, the CCVD mortality of both the unemployed and employed tended to decrease, and their cumulative CCVD mortalities were 549.3 and 319.7 per 100,000 people, respectively.

CCVDs are recognized as occupational diseases in Korea. The amendments to the standards for recognition, the introduction of the Occupational Disease Adjudication Committee, the principle of presumption, and the reduction of working hours have changed the approval rate of occupational CCVDs. A strategic approach is needed to further reduce the incidence of CCVDs.

Periodic revision of assessment tools is essential to ensure risk assessment reliability and validity. Despite the recent revision of the Korea Occupational Safety and Health Agency (KOSHA) 2018, there is no evidence showing that the revision is superior to other cardio-cerebrovascular diseases (CVDs) risk-assessment tools for workplace health management. We conducted a comparative analysis using the Framingham risk score (FRS) as a gold standard to identify the most relevant CVDs risk-assessment tool for workplace health management.

We included 4,460 shipyard workers who had undergone a workers' health examination during January–December 2016. Risk levels for CVDs were calculated based on the FRS, KOSHA 2013, KOSHA 2017, KOSHA 2018 (2 methods), National Health Screening Program health risk appraisal (NHS HRA) 2017, and NHS HRA 2018. Study participants were categorized into low-risk, moderate-risk, or high-risk groups. Sensitivity, specificity, correlation, and agreement of each risk-assessment tool were calculated compared with the FRS as a gold standard. For statistical analyses, Spearman's rank correlation coefficient and the linearly weighted kappa coefficient were calculated.

Sensitivity of the risk assessments was highest in the KOSHA 2018 (health risk appraisal [HRA]). The FRS showed correlation coefficients of 0.354 with the KOSHA 2013, 0.396 with the KOSHA 2017, 0.386 with the KOSHA 2018, 0.505 with the KOSHA 2018 (HRA), 0.288 with the NHS HRA 2017, and 0.622 with the NHS HRA 2018. Kappa values, calculated to examine the agreement in relation to the KOSHA 2013, KOSHA 2017, KOSHA 2018, KOSHA 2018 (HRA), NHS HRA 2017, and NHS HRA 2018 with the FRS, were 0.268, 0.322, 0.352, 0.136, 0.221, and 0.559, respectively.

The NHS HRA 2018 risk calculation method is a useful risk-assessment tool for CVDs, but only when appropriate classification criteria are applied. In order to enhance the risk-group identification capability of the KOSHA guideline, we propose to apply the classification criteria set in this study based on the risk group definition of the 2018 Korean Society of Hypertension guidelines for the management of hypertension instead of the current classification criteria of the KOSHA 2018.