Long working hours are known to account for approximately one-third of the total expected work-related diseases, and much interest and research on long working hours have recently been conducted. Additionally, as the prevalence of prediabetes and the high-risk group for diabetes are increasing worldwide, interest in prediabetes is also rising. However, few studies have addressed the development of type 2 diabetes and long working hours in prediabetes. Therefore, the aim of this longitudinal study was to evaluate the relationship between long working hours and the development of diabetes in prediabetes.
We included 14,258 prediabetes participants with hemoglobinA1c (HbA1c) level of 5.7 to 6.4 in the Kangbuk Samsung Cohort Study. According to a self-reported questionnaire, we evaluated weekly working hours, which were categorized into 35–40, 41–52, and > 52 hours. Development of diabetes was defined as an HbA1c level ≥ 6.5%. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the development of diabetes were estimated using Cox proportional hazards analyses with weekly working 35–40 hours as the reference.
During a median follow-up of 3.0 years, 776 participants developed diabetes (incidence density, 1.66 per 100 person-years). Multivariable-adjusted HRs of development of diabetes for weekly working > 52 hours compared with working 35–40 hours were 2.00 (95% CI: 1.50–2.67). In subgroup analyses by age (< 40 years old, ≥ 40 years old), sex (men, women), and household income (< 6 million KRW, ≥ 6 million KRW), consistent and significant positive associations were observed in all groups.
In our large-scale longitudinal study, long working hours increases the risk of developing diabetes in prediabetes patients.
Citations
The nature of police work often necessitates use of Individual Light Armour Vests (ILAVs) for officer protection. Previous research has demonstrated various biomechanical and physical performance impacts of ILAVs, however, little knowledge exists on the individual officer’s perceptions of ILAV. The aim of this study was to investigate officers’ perceptions of the impacts of three different ILAVs and normal station wear whilst performing police occupational tasks.
A prospective, within subjects, repeated measures design was employed in which 11 serving police officers wore each of three different types of body armour (ILAV A, ILAV B or ILAV C) and normal station wear for a full day while performing tasks including a simulated victim drag, a patrol vehicle exit and a marksmanship shoot. Ratings of Perceived Exertion (RPE) and a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS; − 10 to + 10) were used to examine officer perceptions of each ILAV. Finally, officers were asked to indicate areas of both discomfort and comfort of each ILAV on a mannequin chart.
Officers perceived less effort was required for the victim drag whilst wearing ILAV B (RPE = 3.6/10) when compared to ILAV A, ILAV C and even station wear (RPE = 4.7/10, 4.0/10, 3.8/10, respectively). A positive impact on performance was perceived for ILAV B (VAS = + 0.26) when performing a patrol vehicle exit and sprint task but not for the other two ILAVs (VAS = − 3.58, − 0.55, − 0.85, respectively). Officers perceived a positive impact of ILAV B (VAS = + 2.7) and station wear (VAS = + 1.4) and a negative impact of ILAVs A and C (VAS = − 2.1, − 1.7 respectively) on marksmanship. Despite all armour types being criticized for discomfort, ILAV B received lower ratings of discomfort overall, and some positive comments regarding both comfort and performance.
Officers perceived ILAV B to have positive effects on task performance. It was also rated more comfortable than the other two, possibly due to a longer torso design which shifted load from the shoulders to the hips and pelvis. Officer perceptions of comfort and effects on occupational performance should be considered when designing and procuring armour systems. Although ILAVs may be similar, perceived impacts may vary between officers.
Citations
Effects of aging and leisure time physical activity (LPA) might influence the effect of occupational physical activity (OPA) on risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD). This study was conducted to determine whether OPA affects CVD after controlling the effects of LPA and other risk factors for CVD such as job stress.
Participants were 131 male Korean manual workers. Tests for heart rate variability (HRV) were conducted for five minutes in the morning at work. We defined OPA as the combined concept of relative heart rate ratio (RHR), evaluated using a heart rate monitor.
Whereas high OPA was not related to any HRV items in the younger age group, high OPA was associated with an increased number of low-value cases among all HRV items in older workers. Exercise had beneficial effects only in the younger group. After controlling for exercise and other risk factors, the odds ratios of the root-mean square of the difference of successive normal R-R intervals (rMSSD) and high frequency band power (HF) among the older age and high OPA group compared with the younger age and low OPA group were 64.0 and 18.5, respectively. Social support and shift work were independent risk factors in HRV.
OPA in aging workers increases CVD risks. This study provides support for the need for protection of aging workers from physical work overload, and indicates the need for further study of optimal limits of OPA.
Citations
Several clinical practice guidelines related to the assessment and management of low back pain (LBP) have been published with varied scopes and methods. This paper summarises the first French occupational guidelines for management of work-related LBP (October 2013). There main originality is to treat all the three stages of primary, secondary and tertiary prevention of work-related LBP. The guidelines were written by a multidisciplinary working group of 24 experts, according to the Clinical Practice Guidelines method proposed by French National Health Authority, and reviewed by a multidisciplinary peer review committee of 50 experts. Recommendations were based on a large systematic review of the literature carried out from 1990 to 2012 and rated as strong (Level A), moderate (B), limited (C) or based on expert consensus (D) according to their level of evidence. It is recommended to deliver reassuring and consistent information concerning LBP prognosis (Level B); to perform a clinical examination looking for medical signs of severity related to LBP (Level A), encourage continuation or resumption of physical activity (Level A), identify any changes in working conditions and evaluate the occupational impact of LBP (Level D). In case of persistent/recurrent LBP, assess prognostic factors likely to influence progression to chronic LBP, prolonged disability and delayed return to work (Level A). In case of prolonged/repeated sick leave, evaluate the pain, functional disability and their impact and main risk factors for prolonged work disability (Level A), promote return to work measures and inter professional coordination (Level D). These good practice guidelines are primarily intended for professionals of occupational health but also for treating physicians and paramedical personnel participating in the management of LBP, workers and employers.
Citations
Citations
Citations
Citations
Citations
Citations
Citations
Citations