지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술저널
- 저자정보
- 발행연도
- 2019.5
- 수록면
- 39 - 49 (11page)
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Background: Periodic revision of assessment tools is essential to ensure risk assessment reliability and validity. Despite the recent revision of the Korea Occupational Safety and Health Agency (KOSHA) 2018, there is no evidence showing that the revision is superior to other cardio-cerebrovascular diseases (CVDs) risk-assessment tools for workplace health management. We conducted a comparative analysis using the Framingham risk score (FRS) as a gold standard to identify the most relevant CVDs risk-assessment tool for workplace health management.
Methods: We included 4,460 shipyard workers who had undergone a workers" health examination during January–December 2016. Risk levels for CVDs were calculated based on the FRS, KOSHA 2013, KOSHA 2017, KOSHA 2018 (2 methods), National Health Screening Program health risk appraisal (NHS HRA) 2017, and NHS HRA 2018. Study participants were categorized into low-risk, moderate-risk, or high-risk groups. Sensitivity, specificity, correlation, and agreement of each risk-assessment tool were calculated compared with the FRS as a gold standard. For statistical analyses, Spearman"s rank correlation coefficient and the linearly weighted kappa coefficient were calculated.
Results: Sensitivity of the risk assessments was highest in the KOSHA 2018 (health risk appraisal [HRA]). The FRS showed correlation coefficients of 0.354 with the KOSHA 2013, 0.396 with the KOSHA 2017, 0.386 with the KOSHA 2018, 0.505 with the KOSHA 2018 (HRA), 0.288 with the NHS HRA 2017, and 0.622 with the NHS HRA 2018. Kappa values, calculated to examine the agreement in relation to the KOSHA 2013, KOSHA 2017, KOSHA 2018, KOSHA 2018 (HRA), NHS HRA 2017, and NHS HRA 2018 with the FRS, were 0.268, 0.322, 0.352, 0.136, 0.221, and 0.559, respectively.
Conclusions: The NHS HRA 2018 risk calculation method is a useful risk-assessment tool for CVDs, but only when appropriate classification criteria are applied. In order to enhance the risk-group identification capability of the KOSHA guideline, we propose to apply the classification criteria set in this study based on the risk group definition of the 2018 Korean Society of Hypertension guidelines for the management of hypertension instead of the current classification criteria of the KOSHA 2018.
Methods: We included 4,460 shipyard workers who had undergone a workers" health examination during January–December 2016. Risk levels for CVDs were calculated based on the FRS, KOSHA 2013, KOSHA 2017, KOSHA 2018 (2 methods), National Health Screening Program health risk appraisal (NHS HRA) 2017, and NHS HRA 2018. Study participants were categorized into low-risk, moderate-risk, or high-risk groups. Sensitivity, specificity, correlation, and agreement of each risk-assessment tool were calculated compared with the FRS as a gold standard. For statistical analyses, Spearman"s rank correlation coefficient and the linearly weighted kappa coefficient were calculated.
Results: Sensitivity of the risk assessments was highest in the KOSHA 2018 (health risk appraisal [HRA]). The FRS showed correlation coefficients of 0.354 with the KOSHA 2013, 0.396 with the KOSHA 2017, 0.386 with the KOSHA 2018, 0.505 with the KOSHA 2018 (HRA), 0.288 with the NHS HRA 2017, and 0.622 with the NHS HRA 2018. Kappa values, calculated to examine the agreement in relation to the KOSHA 2013, KOSHA 2017, KOSHA 2018, KOSHA 2018 (HRA), NHS HRA 2017, and NHS HRA 2018 with the FRS, were 0.268, 0.322, 0.352, 0.136, 0.221, and 0.559, respectively.
Conclusions: The NHS HRA 2018 risk calculation method is a useful risk-assessment tool for CVDs, but only when appropriate classification criteria are applied. In order to enhance the risk-group identification capability of the KOSHA guideline, we propose to apply the classification criteria set in this study based on the risk group definition of the 2018 Korean Society of Hypertension guidelines for the management of hypertension instead of the current classification criteria of the KOSHA 2018.
목차
ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION
METHODS
RESULTS
DISCUSSION
CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
참고문헌 (32)
참고문헌 신청
World Health Organization / Disease burden and mortality estimates: cause-specific mortality 2000–2016
Korean Statistical Information Service / Cause of death statistics 1983–2016
Korea Occupational Safety and Health Agency / Statistics on occupational accidents in 2016
World Health Organization / 2007 / Prevention of cardiovascular disease: guidelines for assessment and management of cardiovascular risk / World Health Organization
D'Agostino RB Sr / 2008 / General cardiovascular risk profile for use in primary care: the Framingham heart study / Circulation 117(6):743~753
Korean Statistical Information Service / Cause of death statistics 1983–2016
Korea Occupational Safety and Health Agency / Statistics on occupational accidents in 2016
World Health Organization / 2007 / Prevention of cardiovascular disease: guidelines for assessment and management of cardiovascular risk / World Health Organization
D'Agostino RB Sr / 2008 / General cardiovascular risk profile for use in primary care: the Framingham heart study / Circulation 117(6):743~753
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
조선소 남성 근로자들에서 심뇌혈관질환 위험도 평가도구들의 비교
대한직업환경의학회 학술대회 논문집
2019 .05
-
일개 조선소 남성 근로자들에서 FRS 모형에 따른 범주형 심혈관질환 발병위험도 평가도구 비교
대한직업환경의학회 학술대회 논문집
2017 .11
-
A global, cross cultural study examining the relationship between employee health risk status and work performance metrics
대한직업환경의학회지
2017 .07
-
입자상 대기오염물질의 건강 위해성 평가를 위한 국내 농도반응함수 도출
한국환경보건학회지
2017 .06
-
한국인의 심뇌혈관질환 위험도 예측 및 활용: 국가건강검진 건강위험평가를 중심으로
대한의사협회지
2017 .01
-
Sex differences in the relationship between depression and cardiovascular disease risk: a nationwide study in Korea
Osong Public Health and Research Persptectives
2021 .01
-
Appropriate Surveillance Interval after Colonoscopic Polypectomy in Patients Younger than 50 Years
Journal of Korean Medical Science
2019 .01
-
Risk assessment and management in patients with cerebrovascular events
대한외과학회 학술대회 초록집
2016 .11
-
Health-Related Quality of Life and Cardiovascular Disease Risk in Korean Adults
Korean Journal of Family Medicine
2015 .01
-
Effects of corrective exercises on selective functional movement assessment and health risk appraisal in middle-aged women
Physical therapy rehabilitation science
2016 .01
-
A Study of Institutional Status of Risk Management for Radiotherapy in Foreign Country
의학물리
2016 .09
-
Association between Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Level and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Korean Adults: A Nationwide Cohort Study
Diabetes and Metabolism Journal
2023 .01
-
Overall and cardiovascular mortality according to 10-year cardiovascular risk of the general health checkup: the Kangbuk Samsung Cohort Study
대한직업환경의학회지
2022 .11
-
The Association of Smoking Status and Clustering of Obesity and Depression on the Risk of Early–Onset Cardiovascular Disease in Young Adults: A Nationwide Cohort Study
Korean Circulation Journal
2023 .01
-
Biomedical Laboratory
대한의생명과학회지
2017 .09
-
Fracture Risk Assessment와 Framingham Risk Score를중심으로 한 골절 위험도와 심혈관 질환 위험도와의 상관관계
대한내과학회지
2015 .01
-
KCDC Risk Assessments on the Initial Phase of the COVID-19 Outbreak in Korea
Osong Public Health and Research Persptectives
2020 .01
-
Association between Consumption of Sugar-Sweetened Beverages and Risk of Cardiovascular Disease in Korean Men: Analysis Based on the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey 2014?2016
Korean Journal of Family Medicine
2021 .01
-
Urinary Albumin Excretion Reflects Cardiovascular Risk in Postmenopausal Women without Diabetes: The 2011 to 2013 Korean National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey
Endocrinology and Metabolism
2016 .01
-
중대재해처벌법 시행에 따른 항공분야 위험성 평가 기법 연구
항공우주의학회지
2023 .03
이 논문의 저자 정보
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0