Loef Bette, Hulsegge Gerben, Wendel-Vos G C Wanda, Verschuren W M Monique, Vermeulen Roel C H, Bakker Marije F, van der Beek Allard J, Proper Karin I
Center for Nutrition, Prevention and Health Services, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Bilthoven, The Netherlands.
Department of Public and Occupational Health, EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Occup Environ Med. 2017 May;74(5):328-335. doi: 10.1136/oemed-2016-103878. Epub 2016 Nov 21.
Lack of physical activity (PA) has been hypothesised as an underlying mechanism in the adverse health effects of shift work. Therefore, our aim was to compare non-occupational PA levels between shift workers and non-shift workers. Furthermore, exposure-response relationships for frequency of night shifts and years of shift work regarding non-occupational PA levels were studied.
Data of 5980 non-shift workers and 532 shift workers from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition-Netherlands (EPIC-NL) were used in these cross-sectional analyses. Time spent (hours/week) in different PA types (walking/cycling/exercise/chores) and intensities (moderate/vigorous) were calculated based on self-reported PA. Furthermore, sports were operationalised as: playing sports (no/yes), individual versus non-individual sports, and non-vigorous-intensity versus vigorous-intensity sports. PA levels were compared between shift workers and non-shift workers using Generalized Estimating Equations and logistic regression.
Shift workers reported spending more time walking than non-shift workers (B=2.3 (95% CI 1.2 to 3.4)), but shift work was not associated with other PA types and any of the sports activities. Shift workers who worked 1-4 night shifts/month (B=2.4 (95% CI 0.6 to 4.3)) and ≥5 night shifts/month (B=3.7 (95% CI 1.8 to 5.6)) spent more time walking than non-shift workers. No exposure-response relationships were found between years of shift work and PA levels.
Shift workers spent more time walking than non-shift workers, but we observed no differences in other non-occupational PA levels. To better understand if and how PA plays a role in the negative health consequences of shift work, our findings need to be confirmed in future studies.
缺乏身体活动(PA)被认为是轮班工作对健康产生不利影响的潜在机制。因此,我们的目的是比较轮班工人和非轮班工人的非职业性PA水平。此外,还研究了夜班频率和轮班工作年限与非职业性PA水平之间的暴露-反应关系。
这些横断面分析使用了来自欧洲癌症与营养前瞻性调查-荷兰(EPIC-NL)的5980名非轮班工人和532名轮班工人的数据。根据自我报告的PA计算在不同PA类型(步行/骑自行车/锻炼/家务)和强度(中等/剧烈)上花费的时间(小时/周)。此外,体育活动被定义为:进行体育活动(否/是)、个人运动与非个人运动、非剧烈强度运动与剧烈强度运动。使用广义估计方程和逻辑回归比较轮班工人和非轮班工人的PA水平。
轮班工人报告的步行时间比非轮班工人多(B=2.3(95%CI 1.2至3.4)),但轮班工作与其他PA类型和任何体育活动均无关联。每月上1-4个夜班的轮班工人(B=2.4(95%CI 0.6至4.3))和每月上≥5个夜班的轮班工人(B=3.7(95%CI 1.8至5.6))步行时间比非轮班工人多。未发现轮班工作年限与PA水平之间存在暴露-反应关系。
轮班工人的步行时间比非轮班工人多,但我们观察到其他非职业性PA水平没有差异。为了更好地理解PA是否以及如何在轮班工作对健康的负面影响中发挥作用,我们的研究结果需要在未来的研究中得到证实。