Sex differences in risk factors for metabolic syndrome in middle-aged and senior hospital employees: a population-based cohort study.

Hsu-Chieh Chang, Yi-Syuan Wu, Wen-Chii Tzeng, Hao-Yi Wu, Pai-Ching Lee, Wei-Yun Wang
Author Information
  1. Hsu-Chieh Chang: Department of Nursing, Tri-Service General Hospital and School of Nursing, Taipei Medical University, Taipei, Taiwan.
  2. Yi-Syuan Wu: Trauma and Critical Care Service, Department of Surgery, Kaohsiung Medical University Hospital, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
  3. Wen-Chii Tzeng: School of Nursing, National Defense Medical Center, Taipei, Taiwan.
  4. Hao-Yi Wu: Department of Nursing, Tri-Service General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan.
  5. Pai-Ching Lee: Department of Nursing, Tri-Service General Hospital and Graduate Institute of Applied Science and Technology, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Taipei, Taiwan.
  6. Wei-Yun Wang: Department of Nursing, Tri-Service General Hospital Songshan Branch and School of Nursing, National Defense Medical Center, Taipei, Taiwan. s801010225@mail.ndmctsgh.edu.tw.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Several cross-sectional studies have reported risk factors for metabolic syndrome (MetS). However, these studies did not focus on sex differences in middle-aged and senior populations or employ a longitudinal design. These study design differences are important, as there are sex differences in lifestyle habits associated with MetS, and middle-aged and senior individuals have increased MetS susceptibility. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine whether sex differences influenced MetS risk over a ten-year follow-up period among middle-aged and senior hospital employees.
METHODS: This population-based and prospective cohort study enrolled 565 participants who did not have MetS in 2012 for a ten-year repeated-measurement analysis. Data were retrieved from the hospital's Health Management Information System. Analyses included Student's t tests, χ tests and Cox regression. P < 0.05 indicated statistical significance.
RESULTS: Male middle-aged and senior hospital employees had an elevated MetS risk (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.936, p < 0.001). Men with more than four family history risk factors had an increased risk of MetS (HR = 1.969, p = 0.010). Women who worked shift duty (HR = 1.326, p = 0.020), had more than two chronic diseases (HR = 1.513, p = 0.012), had three family history risk factors (HR = 1.623, p = 0.010), or chewed betel nuts (HR = 9.710, p = 0.002) had an increased risk of MetS.
CONCLUSIONS: The longitudinal design of our study improves the understanding of sex differences in MetS risk factors in middle-aged and senior adults. A significantly elevated risk of MetS over the ten-year follow-up period was associated with male sex, shift work, the number of chronic diseases, the number of family history risk factors, and betel nut chewing. Women who chewed betel nuts had an especially increased risk of MetS. Our study indicates that population-specific studies are important for the identification of subgroups susceptible to MetS and for the implementation of hospital-based strategies.

Keywords

References

  1. Clinics (Sao Paulo). 2011;66(9):1531-5 [PMID: 22179154]
  2. Am J Health Behav. 2020 May 1;44(3):282-291 [PMID: 32295676]
  3. J Korean Med Sci. 2006 Aug;21(4):701-8 [PMID: 16891816]
  4. J Pers Med. 2021 Nov 06;11(11): [PMID: 34834506]
  5. Medicine (Baltimore). 2018 Aug;97(31):e11664 [PMID: 30075556]
  6. Healthcare (Basel). 2022 Jul 18;10(7): [PMID: 35885862]
  7. J Physiol Anthropol. 2011;30(1):15-22 [PMID: 21307616]
  8. SSM Popul Health. 2021 Jul 28;15:100881 [PMID: 34401460]
  9. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019 Jul 27;16(15): [PMID: 31357596]
  10. Curr Hypertens Rep. 2018 Feb 26;20(2):12 [PMID: 29480368]
  11. J Nutr Health Aging. 2012 May;16(5):445-8 [PMID: 22555788]
  12. PLoS One. 2018 Apr 18;13(4):e0196012 [PMID: 29668762]
  13. PLoS One. 2013 Aug 05;8(8):e70679 [PMID: 23940623]
  14. BMC Public Health. 2021 Nov 6;21(1):2033 [PMID: 34742269]
  15. Endocrine. 2018 Mar;59(3):614-621 [PMID: 29340961]
  16. BMC Med. 2012 Nov 14;10:139 [PMID: 23151252]
  17. Res Integr Peer Rev. 2016 May 03;1:2 [PMID: 29451543]
  18. Asia Pac J Public Health. 2011 May;23(3):307-14 [PMID: 19625323]
  19. Eur J Nutr. 2016 Oct;55(7):2321-30 [PMID: 26659071]
  20. Sci Rep. 2020 Dec 17;10(1):22131 [PMID: 33335312]
  21. Diabetol Metab Syndr. 2015 May 17;7:45 [PMID: 25991926]
  22. Int J Occup Environ Med. 2018 Jan;9(1):45-51 [PMID: 29319054]
  23. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020 Jul 28;17(15): [PMID: 32731424]
  24. BMC Public Health. 2013 Oct 19;13:975 [PMID: 24138825]
  25. Nutrients. 2016 Mar 25;8(4):180 [PMID: 27023599]
  26. BMC Public Health. 2017 Aug 3;18(1):96 [PMID: 28774298]
  27. Lancet. 2020 Aug 22;396(10250):565-582 [PMID: 32828189]
  28. Biomed Rep. 2019 May;10(5):311-317 [PMID: 31086665]
  29. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2020 Sep 24;30(10):1785-1794 [PMID: 32605881]
  30. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2015 May-Jun;30(3):256-66 [PMID: 24695075]
  31. Diabetes Metab Syndr. 2019 Jan - Feb;13(1):338-342 [PMID: 30641722]
  32. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2018 Apr 27;16(1):76 [PMID: 29699575]
  33. PLoS One. 2018 Mar 22;13(3):e0194490 [PMID: 29566051]
  34. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Mar 19;15(3): [PMID: 29562671]
  35. Int J Cardiol. 2018 May 15;259:216-219 [PMID: 29472026]
  36. SAGE Open Med. 2020 Nov 20;8:2050312120973493 [PMID: 33282297]
  37. J Nurs Manag. 2022 Oct;30(7):2495-2502 [PMID: 35698438]
  38. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2020 Sep/Oct;35(5):502-511 [PMID: 32732778]
  39. Prev Chronic Dis. 2017 Mar 16;14:E24 [PMID: 28301314]
  40. Biol Res Nurs. 2019 Mar;21(2):173-181 [PMID: 30522333]
  41. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Apr 01;18(7): [PMID: 33916247]
  42. Nutr J. 2013 May 20;12:67 [PMID: 23688186]
  43. BMC Health Serv Res. 2022 Jun 30;22(1):839 [PMID: 35773661]
  44. JAMA. 2001 May 16;285(19):2486-97 [PMID: 11368702]
  45. Diabetes Metab Syndr. 2017 Jan - Mar;11(1):43-46 [PMID: 27596043]
  46. Circulation. 2005 Oct 25;112(17):2735-52 [PMID: 16157765]
  47. Oxid Med Cell Longev. 2018 May 21;2018:9303094 [PMID: 29951168]
  48. Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci. 2020 Dec 17;30:e1 [PMID: 33331255]
  49. Healthc Exec. 2013 Jul-Aug;28(4):20-2, 24-6, 28-9 [PMID: 24205557]
  50. West J Emerg Med. 2021 Feb 08;22(2):346-352 [PMID: 33856322]
  51. Nutrients. 2019 Sep 02;11(9): [PMID: 31480732]
  52. Oncotarget. 2017 Sep 2;8(43):73568-73578 [PMID: 29088727]
  53. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Sep 17;18(18): [PMID: 34574750]

MeSH Term

Adult
Middle Aged
Humans
Male
Female
Metabolic Syndrome
Cohort Studies
Prospective Studies
Cross-Sectional Studies
Sex Characteristics
Risk Factors
Areca
Research Design
Hospitals

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0riskMetSfactorsdifferencesmiddle-agedseniorstudysexp = 0increasedHR = 1studiessyndromedesignten-yearhospitalemployeesfamilyhistorybetelmetaboliclongitudinalimportantassociatedfollow-upperiodpopulation-basedcohorttestselevated010WomenshiftchronicdiseaseschewednutsnumberSexBACKGROUND:Severalcross-sectionalreportedHoweverfocuspopulationsemploylifestylehabitsindividualssusceptibilityThereforepurposeexaminewhetherinfluencedamongMETHODS:prospectiveenrolled565participants2012repeated-measurementanalysisDataretrievedhospital'sHealthManagementInformationSystemAnalysesincludedStudent'stχCoxregressionP < 005indicatedstatisticalsignificanceRESULTS:MalehazardratioHR = 1936p < 0001Menfour969workedduty326020two513012three623HR = 9710002CONCLUSIONS:improvesunderstandingadultssignificantlymaleworknutchewingespeciallyindicatespopulation-specificidentificationsubgroupssusceptibleimplementationhospital-basedstrategiesemployees:HospitalLifestylehabitMetabolicMiddle-agedSeniordifference

Similar Articles

Cited By