Department of Healthcare Policy and Research, Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine, Richmond, VA 23298-0430, USA.
Am J Drug Alcohol Abuse. 2013 Mar;39(2):108-14. doi: 10.3109/00952990.2012.694537. Epub 2012 Jul 2.
Understanding associations between binge drinking and occupation is important from economic and public health perspectives.
While unadjusted differences in binge drinking by occupation have been reported previously, this study tests these differences after adjusting for important common determinants.
To assess the relationship between occupation and binge drinking after adjusting for worker characteristics, a probit model was fit to data from 29,785 working-age respondents to the 2005 California Health Interview Survey. Unadjusted and adjusted marginal effects are reported. Professionals, the largest employed category, were the referent.
Professionals had a binge drinking risk of 16.6%. Before adjustment, workers in several occupational groups had higher risk compared to professionals, including those in installation (15.2 percentage points higher; 95% CI: 9.2, 21.1), construction (14.8 percentage points higher; 95% CI: 10.4, 19.2), and sales (6.9 percentage points higher; 95% CI: 4.0, 9.9), while those without employment had a 6.6 point lower risk (95% CI: -8.4, -4.9). After adjustment, workers employed in installation were 6.7 points (95% CI: 1.8, 11.7), construction 4.8 points (95% CI: 1.0, 8.6), and salespersons 5.3 points (95% CI: 2.8, 7.7) more likely to binge drink relative to professionals. No significant adjusted differences in risk between professionals and those without a job were found.
This study demonstrates binge drinking varies significantly across occupations. Adjusting for worker characteristics accounted for much of the unadjusted relationship between employment in physically demanding occupations (e.g., installation, construction) and binge drinking. Distinguishing between occupation- and employee-level determinants of alcohol misuse may improve employee assistance programs and preventive services.
从经济和公共卫生角度来看,了解酗酒与职业之间的关联非常重要。
虽然之前已经报道过职业与酗酒之间未经调整的差异,但本研究在调整了重要的共同决定因素后,对这些差异进行了检验。
为了评估在调整工人特征后职业与酗酒之间的关系,使用概率单位模型对 2005 年加利福尼亚健康访谈调查中 29785 名工作年龄的受访者的数据进行拟合。报告了未经调整和调整后的边际效应。专业人员是最大的就业类别,作为参考。
专业人员的酗酒风险为 16.6%。在未经调整的情况下,与专业人员相比,一些职业群体的工人风险更高,包括安装工(高 15.2 个百分点;95%CI:9.2,21.1)、建筑工人(高 14.8 个百分点;95%CI:10.4,19.2)和销售人员(高 6.9 个百分点;95%CI:4.0,9.9),而失业人员的风险低 6.6 个百分点(95%CI:-8.4,-4.9)。调整后,安装工人的风险增加了 6.7 个百分点(95%CI:1.8,11.7),建筑工人增加了 4.8 个百分点(95%CI:1.0,8.6),销售人员增加了 5.3 个百分点(95%CI:2.8,7.7),相对于专业人员而言,更容易酗酒。在调整后,专业人员与无工作人员之间的风险没有显著差异。
本研究表明,酗酒在职业之间存在显著差异。调整工人特征后,很大程度上解释了体力要求高的职业(如安装、建筑)与酗酒之间未经调整的关系。区分职业和员工层面的酒精滥用决定因素可能会改善员工援助计划和预防服务。