Survey of shift and work tolerance of City of Houston emergency medical service personnel

This study of ambulance workers for the emergency medical services of the City of Houston studied the factors related to shiftwork tolerance and intolerance. The EMS personnel work a 24-hour shift with rotating days of the week. Workers are assigned to A, B, C, D shift, each of which rotate 24-hours on, 24-hours off, 24-hours on and 4 days off. One-hundred and seventy-six male EMTs, paramedics and chauffeurs from stations of varying levels of activity were surveyed. The sample group ranged in age from 20 to 45. The average tenure on the job was 8.2 years. Over 68% of the workers held a second job, the majority of which worked over 20 hours a week at the second position.^ The survey instrument was a 20-page questionnaire modeled after the Folkard Standardized Shiftwork Index. In addition to demographic data, the survey tool provided measurements of general job satisfaction, sleep quality, general health complaints, morningness/eveningness, cognitive and somatic anxiety, depression, and circadian types. The survey questionnaire included an EMS-specific scaler of stress.^ A conceptual model of Shiftwork Tolerance was presented to identify the key factors examined in the study. An extensive list of 265 variables was reduced to 36 key variables that related to: (1) shift schedule and demographic/lifestyle factors, (2) individual differences related to traits and characteristics, and (3) tolerance/intolerance effects. Using the general job satisfaction scaler as the key measurement of shift tolerance/intolerance, it was shown that a significant relationship existed between this dependent variable and stress, number of years working a 24-hour shift, sleep quality, languidness/vigorousness. The usual amount of sleep received during the shift, general health complaints and flexibility/rigidity (R$\sp2$ =.5073).^ The sample consisted of a majority of morningness-types or extreme-morningness types, few evening-types and no extreme-evening types, duplicating the findings of Motohashi's previous study of ambulance workers. The level of activity by station was not significant on any of the dependent variables examined. However, the shift worked had a relationship with sleep quality, despite the fact that all shifts work the same hours and participate in the same rotation schedule. ^

Prevalence and risk factors of asthma and work -related asthma among U.S. adults: Data from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1988--1994

This cross-sectional analysis of the data from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey was conducted to determine the prevalence and determinants of asthma and wheezing among US adults, and to identify the occupations and industries at high risk of developing work-related asthma and work-related wheezing. Separate logistic models were developed for physician-diagnosed asthma (MD asthma), wheezing in the previous 12 months (wheezing), work-related asthma and work-related wheezing. Major risk factors including demographic, socioeconomic, indoor air quality, allergy, and other characteristics were analyzed. The prevalence of lifetime MD asthma was 7.7% and the prevalence of wheezing was 17.2%. Mexican-Americans exhibited the lowest prevalence of MD asthma (4.8%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 4.2, 5.4) when compared to other race-ethnic groups. The prevalence of MD asthma or wheezing did not vary by gender. Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that Mexican-Americans were less likely to develop MD asthma (adjusted odds ratio (ORa) = 0.64, 95%CI: 0.45, 0.90) and wheezing (ORa = 0.55, 95%CI: 0.44, 0.69) when compared to non-Hispanic whites. Low education level, current and past smoking status, pet ownership, lifetime diagnosis of physician-diagnosed hay fever and obesity were all significantly associated with MD asthma and wheezing. No significant effect of indoor air pollutants on asthma and wheezing was observed in this study. The prevalence of work-related asthma was 3.70% (95%CI: 2.88, 4.52) and the prevalence of work-related wheezing was 11.46% (95%CI: 9.87, 13.05). The major occupations identified at risk of developing work-related asthma and wheezing were cleaners; farm and agriculture related occupations; entertainment related occupations; protective service occupations; construction; mechanics and repairers; textile; fabricators and assemblers; other transportation and material moving occupations; freight, stock and material movers; motor vehicle operators; and equipment cleaners. The population attributable risk for work-related asthma and wheeze were 26% and 27% respectively. The major industries identified at risk of work-related asthma and wheeze include entertainment related industry; agriculture, forestry and fishing; construction; electrical machinery; repair services; and lodging places. The population attributable risk for work-related asthma was 36.5% and work-related wheezing was 28.5% for industries. Asthma remains an important public health issue in the US and in the other regions of the world. ^