An Epidemiological Study for Desirable Health Habits Affecting Workers' Health Status

  • Lee, Myung-Sun (Department of Health Education, School of Education, Ewha Womans University)
  • Published : 2002.12.25

Abstract

This study identified the health habits affecting health status of industrial workers. Data was collected from 965 workers in 58 companies at Buchon. The research conducted a self-administered questionnaire survey and obtained the workers' health examination records. The results were as follows: 1. Among 965 respondents, men were 82.4%, women were 17.6%, 44.5% were of the 30${\sim}$40 age group, the married were 67.4%, the single were 30.8%, high school graduates were 81.1% and 38.8% were of people who worked between 1 and 5 years 2. As far as the seven health habits, current smokers were 52.8%, people who regularly exercise was 28.5%, 7${\sim}$8 hour of sleep, on the average were 71.4%, people eating breakfast nearly every day were 8.8%, and people eating between meals almost every day were 46.5%. Heavy drinkers who drink 3${\sim}$4 times or more per week were 14.2%, 1${\sim}$2 times per week were 32.6% and the obese were 9.3%. 3, Health status of A and B, estimated by doctors in the health examination were 80.8% and C, D1, D2, the unhealthy were 19.2%. For men, those who reported more than women in unhealthy groups and the results regarding health status reflects those for gender, educational level and age. That is to say that, lower educational level group and over 30 years of age group perceive their health to be worse than the higher educational level and under 30 age group. And these differences were statistically significant. 4. The relationship between health habits and health status were examined based on the odds ratio. Current smokers had a consistently worse health status than a non smokers with a 1.98 odds ratio. The workers who reported eating breakfast rarely or never were more associated with the unhealthy group than the regular breakfast eating group with a 2.96 odds ratio. One or more drink per week had a worse health status than a never or a little drinker with a 1.56 odds ratio. 5. General health habit score and duration of work were selected as significant factors influencing health status from the result of logistic regression analysis. According to the results of this model, the odds ratio of good health status was 2.08 for good health habit score, 1.63 for workers who worked five years or more duration at work. In summary, good health habits were associated with good health status. In particular, the workers who had 5 or more desirable health habits had a significantly better health status than the workers who had 4 or less than 4 good health habits. Therefore, in order to provide the health promotion programs to workers it is necessary to organize clear health management plans based on effective health education and health service perspective. If further research examines health habits and health status using a prospective study design, More precise findings for health promotion program development in the worksite and worksite health management planning.

Keywords

References

  1. Anderson S, Aupuier A, Hauck WW, Oakes D, Vandaele W, Weisberg HI. Statistical Methods for comparative studies. John Wiley and Sons, 1990
  2. Allison PD. Event history analysis. SageUniversity paper series on Quantiative applications in the social sciences. series No. 07-046, Bevery Hills and London: Sage Pubns, 1984
  3. Babara AP, Fundamental of Industrial Hygiene. National safety Council 1998; 3-7
  4. Belloc NB, Breslow L. Hochstim JR. Measurment of Physical Health in a General Population survey. Am J Epidemiol 1971; 93(5): 328-336 https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a121265
  5. Belloc NB, Breslow L. Relationship of Physical Health Status and Health Practices. Prev Med 1972; 1: 409-421 https://doi.org/10.1016/0091-7435(72)90014-X
  6. Breslow L and Breslow N. Health Practices and Disability: Some evidence from Alameda County. Prev Med 1993; 2: 86-95
  7. Breslow L and Breslow N. Health Practices and Disability: Some evidence from Alameda County. Prev Med 1993; 2: 86-95
  8. Breslow L and Enstrom JE, Persistence of Health Habits and Their Relationship to Motality. Prev Med 1980; 9: 469-483 https://doi.org/10.1016/0091-7435(80)90042-0
  9. Brock BM, Haefuer DP, Noble DS. Alameda County Redux: Replication in Michigan. Prev Med 1988; 17: 483-495 https://doi.org/10.1016/0091-7435(88)90047-3
  10. Chernof BA, Sherman SE, Lanto AB, Lee ML, Yano EM, Rubenstein LV. Health habit counseling amidst competing demands: effects ofpatient health habits and visit characteristics. Med Care 1999; 37 (8): 738-47 https://doi.org/10.1097/00005650-199908000-00004
  11. Cohen S. Psychosocial models of the role of social support in the etiology ofphysical diseases Health Psychology, 1998;7:269-297
  12. Cohen J & Cohen P. Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences. (2 ed.) Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1983
  13. Eberhard W. Lifestyle and Living Conditions and their Impact on Health-A Report of the Meeting. Scottish Health Education Group, European Monographs in Health Education Research 5. Edinburgh 2000; pp.5-6
  14. Everly GS and Feldman R HL Occupational Health Promotion. John Wiley & sons, 1985
  15. Fredrick T, Frericus RR, Clark C. Personal Health Habits and Symptoms of Depression at the Community Level. PrevMed 1998; 17: 173-182
  16. Knowles JJ. Doing Better and Feeling Worse ; Health in the United states. New York, Norton, 1977
  17. McQueen DV. Thoughts on the ideological origines of health promotion, Health promotion, Oxford : Oxford University Press. 1993
  18. Metzner HL, Carman WJ, House J. Health Practices, Risk Factors, and Chronic Disease in Tecumseh, Prev Med 1993; 12: 491-507
  19. Huurre TM & Aro HM. Long-term psychosocial effects of persistent chronic illness. A follow-up study of Finnish adolescents aged 16 to 32 years, Eur Child Adolesc Psychiatry 2002; 11 (2): 85-91 https://doi.org/10.1007/s007870200015
  20. Norusis MJ. SPSS Base 8.0 User's Guide. Chicago: SPSS, 1997
  21. Roberts RE and Lee ES, Health Practices among Mexican Americans. Futher Evidence from the Human Population Laboratory Studies. Prev Med 1990; 9: 675-688
  22. ScWesslemanJJ. Case-control studies. Oxford University Press Inc., 1982
  23. Thomas AE, McKay DA, Cutlip MB. A Nomograph Method for Assessing Body Weight. Am J Clin Nutrition 1986; 29(march): 302-304
  24. WHO. Targets for Health for All 2000. WHO Regional office for Europe, 1996
  25. Wiley JA and Camacho TC, Life style and Future Health. Evidence from the Alameda County Study. Prev Med 1980; 9: 1-21 https://doi.org/10.1016/0091-7435(80)90056-0
  26. Wilson RW, Elinson J. National Survey of Personal Health Practices and Consequences. Background, Conceptual Issues, and Selected Findings. Public Health Rep 1981; 95(3): 218-225
  27. Wilson RW, Elinson J. National Survey of Personal Health Practices and Consequences. Background, Conceptual Issues, and Selected Findings. Public Health Rep 1981; 95(3): 218-225