Advertisement

Canadian Journal of Public Health

, Volume 104, Issue 7, pp e502–e508 | Cite as

Psychosocial Risk at Work and Hazardous Alcohol Consumption Among Chile’s Working Adults

  • Elisa AnsoleagaEmail author
  • Rosa Montaño
  • Michel Vézina
Quantitative Research

Abstract

Objectives

Karasek’s demand-control model and Siegrist’s effort-reward imbalance model have accumulated solid evidence regarding the associations between exposure to psychosocial risk at work (PSRW) and mental health of workers. However, there is scarce such evidence with regard to its associations with alcohol consumption. This study proposed to estimate the associations between exposure to PSRW and hazardous alcohol consumption (HAC) in Chile’s working adult population.

Method

The study was cross-sectional and a nationally representative survey was applied to 3,010 workers (65% male and 35% female, ages 20 to 65). The analysis included prevalences and logistic regression controlling for covariables.

Results

The adjusted analyses show that male workers exposed to low social support (OR=1.47; 95% CI:1.14–1.89), low reward (OR=1.38; 95% CI:1.07–1.78) and effort-reward imbalance (OR=1.34; 95% CI:1.04–1.73) have a higher chance of presenting with HAC compared to those who are not exposed. Female workers exposed to effort-reward imbalance (OR=2.34; 95% CI:1.10–5.58) have twice the risk of HAC compared with their reference group.

Conclusion

This study shows evidence of the associations between HAC and exposure to a set of psychosocial risk factors from the Karasek and Siegrist models. For future research, it is recommended that HAC and PSRW factors be examined in a longitudinal study in order to control for possible confounding effects on these associations.

Key words

Alcohol consumption effort-reward imbalance demand-control-support model work stress 

Résumé

Objectifs

Le modèle ªDemande-Latitude« de Karasek et le modèle ªDéséquilibre Efforts/Reconnaissance« de Siegrist accumulent des preuves solides sur les associations entre l’exposition aux risques psychosociaux au travail (RPT) et la santé mentale des travailleurs. Cependant, il existe peu de preuves de la sorte en ce qui a trait aux associations entre les RPT et la consommation d’alcool. Nous avons voulu estimer les associations entre l’exposition aux RPT et la consommation dangereuse d’alcool (CDA) dans la population active d’âge adulte du Chili.

Méthode

Une enquête représentative nationale transversale a été menée auprès de 3 010 travailleurs (65% d’hommes et 35% de femmes, 20 à 65 ans). L’analyse a inclus le calcul des prévalences et de la régression logistique après ajustement pour tenir compte des effets des covariables.

Résultats

Les analyses ajustées montrent que les travailleurs masculins exposés à un faible soutien social (RC=1,47; IC de 95%: 1,14–1,89), à une faible reconnaissance (RC=1,38; IC de 95%: 1,07-1,78) et à un déséquilibre efforts/reconnaissance (RC=1,34; IC de 95%: 1,04–1,73) ont une probabilité supérieure de présenter une CDA comparativement aux travailleurs non exposés. Les travailleuses exposées à un déséquilibre efforts/reconnaissance (RC=2,34; IC de 95%: 1,10–5,58) ont un risque deux fois supérieur de présenter une CDA comparativement à leur groupe témoin.

Conclusion

Cette étude prouve qu’il existe des associations entre la CDA et l’exposition à un ensemble de facteurs de risque psychosociaux tirés des modèles de Karasek et de Siegrist. Pour pousser la recherche, il est recommandé d’examiner les facteurs de la CDA et des RPT dans une étude longitudinale afin de tenir compte des effets de facteurs de confusion possibles sur ces associations.

Mots clés

consommation d’alcool déséquilibre efforts/reconnaissance modèle demande-latitude-soutien stress professionnel 

References

  1. 1.
    World Health Organization. The World Health Report 2001. Mental Health: New Understanding, New Hope. Geneva, Switzerland: WHO, 2001.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    World Health Organization. The World Health Report 2002. Reducing risks, promoting healthy life. Geneva: WHO, 2002.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rehm J, Monteiro M. Alcohol consumption and burden of disease in the Americas: Implications for alcohol policy. Rev Panam Salud Publica 2005;18:241–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    OMS. Invertir en Salud Mental. Ginebra: Departamento de Salud mental y abuso de sustancias, Organización Mundial de la Salud, 2004.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ministerio de Salud. Estudio carga de enfermedad y carga atribuible 2007. Santiago, Chile: MINSAL, Gobierno de Chile, Departamento de Epidemiología, 2007.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Parker D, Harford, TC. The epidemiology of alcohol consumption and dependence across occupations in the United States. Alcohol Health Res World 1992;16:97–105.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hemmingsson T, Lundberg I, Romelsjo A, Alfredsson L. Alcoholism in social classes and occupations in Sweden. Int J Epidemiol 1997;26:584–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gobierno de Chile. Primera encuesta nacional de empleo, trabajo, salud y calidad de vida de los trabajadores y trabajadoras en Chile (ENETS 2009–2010). Santiago: Ministerio de Salud y Ministerio de Trabajo, 2011.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Plant M. The role of alcohol in women’s lives: A review of issues and responses. J Substance Use 2008;13:155–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ames G, Janes C. A cultural approach to conceptualizing alcohol and the workplace. Alcohol Health Res World 1992;16:112–19.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Derriennic F, Montaño R. Intensificación del trabajo y repercusiones sobre la salud mental. Argumentos epidemiológicos aportados por la encuesta ESTEV; INSERM U 88 Saint Maurice- France. Québec: Université Laval, 2002.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Houtman I, Kompier M. Trabajo y salud mental. In: Organización Internacional del Trabajo, editor. Enciclopedia de Salud y Seguridad en el Trabajo. Madrid, Spain: OIT, 2001.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Karasek R, Theorell T. Stress Productivity and the Reconstruction of Working Life. New York, NY: Basics Books, 1990.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Siegrist J. Adverse health effects of high-effort/low-reward conditions. J Occup Health Psychol 1996;1:27–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Stansfeld S, Candy B. Psychosocial work environment and mental health—a meta-analytic review. Scand J Work Environ Health 2006;32:443–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bonde JP. Psychosocial factors at work and risk of depression: A systematic review of the epidemiological evidence. Occup Environ Med 2008;65:438–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hemmingsson T, Lundberg I. Work control, work demands, and work social support in relation to alcoholism among young men. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 1998;22:921–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Niedhammer I, Goldberg M, Leclerc A, David S, Bugel I, Landre MF. Psychosocial work environment and cardiovascular risk factors in an occupational cohort in France. J Epidemiol Community Health 1998;52:93–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Head J, Stansfeld SA, Siegrist J. The psychosocial work environment and alcohol dependence: A prospective study. Occup Environ Med 2004;61:219–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bobak M, Pikhart H, Kubinova R, Malyutina S, Pajak A, Sebakova H, et al. The association between psychosocial characteristics at work and problem drinking: A cross-sectional study of men in three Eastern European urban populations. Occup Environ Med 2005;62:546–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kouvonen A, Kivimaki M, Cox SJ, Poikolainen K, Cox T, Vahtera J. Job strain, effort-reward imbalance, and heavy drinking: A study in 40,851 employees. J Occup Environ Med 2005;47:503–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Romelsjo A, Hasin D, Hilton M, Boström G, Diderichsen F, Haglund B, et al. The relationship between stressful working conditions and high alcohol consumption and severe alcohol problems in an urban general population. Br J Addict 1992;87:1173–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    IRSST, INSPQ, ISQ. EQCOTESST Enquête Québécoise sur les Conditions de Travail, d’Emploi, de Santé et Sécurité du Travail. Québec 2010. Available at: https://doi.org/www.irsst.qc.ca/ (Accessed January 10, 2012).Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Siegrist J, Wege N, Puhlhofer F, Wahrendorf M. A short generic measure of work stress in the era of globalization: Effort-reward imbalance. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 2009;82:1005–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ansoleaga E, Montaño R, Vézina M. Validation of two complementary instruments for measuring work stress in Chilean workers. Scand J Organizational Psychol 2013; 5 (2) 5–14.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Alvarado ME, Garmendia ML, Acuña G, Santis R, Arteaga O. [Assessment of the alcohol use disorders identification test (AUDIT) to detect problem drinkers]. Rev Med Chil 2009;137:1463–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Greenberg ES, Grunberg L. Work alienation and problem alcohol behavior. J Health Soc Behav 1995;36:83–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Siegrist J. Stress-Related Diseases: The Contribution of Effort-Reward Imbalance. Conférence publique conjointe GIROST, URESP, DMSP, INSPQ, 2004.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Yang MJ, Yang MS, Kawachi I. Work experience and drinking behavior: Alienation, occupational status, workplace drinking subculture and problem drinking. Public Health 2001;115:265–71.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Frone MR. Work stress and alcohol use. Alcohol Res Health 1999;23:284–91.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Canadian Public Health Association 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Elisa Ansoleaga
    • 1
    • 4
    • 5
    Email author
  • Rosa Montaño
    • 2
    • 4
  • Michel Vézina
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversidad Diego PortalesSantiagoChile
  2. 2.Department of Math and Computational Science, Faculty of ScienceUniversidad de SantiagoSantiagoChile
  3. 3.Social and Preventive Medicine DepartmentLaval UniversityQuebecCanada
  4. 4.Institute of Public HealthUniversidad de ChileSantiagoChile
  5. 5.Santiago CentroChile

Personalised recommendations