Hebert P R, Buring J E, O'Connor G T, Rosner B, Hennekens C H
Channing Laboratory, Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
Arch Intern Med. 1992 Nov;152(11):2253-7.
While some analytic studies have suggested that individuals in occupations representing higher compared with lower socioeconomic status have a decreased risk of coronary heart disease, it is unclear whether occupation itself has an etiologic role in the development of coronary heart disease or whether differences in as yet uncontrolled coronary risk factors may account for these differences in risk.
White-collar vs blue-collar occupation and risk of coronary heart disease was evaluated among 230 male patients hospitalized for a first myocardial infarction and 222 control subjects of the same age, sex, and neighborhood of residence. Information on coronary risk factors was obtained from home interviews, and blood specimens were drawn to test lipid and lipoprotein levels. Usual occupation was dichotomized into white-collar and blue-collar occupation according to the Edwards' classification.
The relative risk of myocardial infarction of white-collar compared with blue-collar workers was 0.74 (95% confidence interval, 0.46 to 1.19) after controlling for age, cigarette smoking, family history of premature myocardial infarction, history of treatment for high blood pressure, body mass index, history of diabetes, alcohol consumption, type A personality, leisure-time physical activity, total calories, and percentage of calories consumed as saturated fat. However, there was no residual association after control for high-density lipoprotein cholesterol yielding a relative risk of 0.98 (95% confidence interval, 0.59 to 1.63).
These results suggest that white-collar occupation per se does not appear to protect from coronary heart disease. Any apparent protective effect on myocardial infarction that has been previously observed in white-collar compared with blue-collar workers may be attributable to differences in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels.
虽然一些分析研究表明,与社会经济地位较低的职业相比,社会经济地位较高的职业人群患冠心病的风险较低,但尚不清楚职业本身在冠心病的发生发展中是否具有病因学作用,或者尚未得到控制的冠心病危险因素差异是否可以解释这些风险差异。
在230例因首次心肌梗死住院的男性患者以及222例年龄、性别和居住社区相同的对照者中,评估白领职业与蓝领职业和冠心病风险之间的关系。通过家庭访谈获取冠心病危险因素信息,并采集血样检测血脂和脂蛋白水平。根据爱德华兹分类法,将通常从事的职业分为白领职业和蓝领职业。
在控制年龄、吸烟、早发心肌梗死家族史、高血压治疗史、体重指数、糖尿病史、饮酒、A型性格、休闲时间体力活动、总热量以及饱和脂肪摄入热量百分比后,白领工人与蓝领工人相比,心肌梗死的相对风险为0.74(95%置信区间为0.46至1.19)。然而,在控制高密度脂蛋白胆固醇后,没有残余关联,相对风险为0.98(95%置信区间为0.59至1.63)。
这些结果表明白领职业本身似乎并不能预防冠心病。与蓝领工人相比,先前在白领中观察到的对心肌梗死的任何明显保护作用可能归因于高密度脂蛋白胆固醇水平的差异。