4.2 Article

Work-related asthma and employment status-38 states and District of Columbia, 2006-2009

Journal

JOURNAL OF ASTHMA
Volume 50, Issue 9, Pages 954-959

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.3109/02770903.2013.829491

Keywords

Asthma; behavioral risk factor surveillance system; employment; occupational health

Funding

  1. Intramural CDC HHS [CC999999] Funding Source: Medline

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: To examine differences in current employment status between persons with health professional-diagnosed work-related asthma and non-work-related asthma and to examine factors associated with unemployment in these groups. Methods: We analyzed the 2006-2009 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System Asthma Call-back Survey for ever-employed adults (excluding those who were retired, homemakers and students at the time of the interview) with current asthma in 38 states and District of Columbia (N = 25 680). We calculated prevalence ratios (PRs) adjusted for age, sex, race/ethnicity, education and income. Results: Among adults with current asthma, individuals with work-related asthma were less likely to be currently employed for wages (PR = 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84-0.95) and more likely to be unable to work (PR = 1.44; 95% CI = 1.24-1.67) than those with non-work-related asthma. Among adults with current asthma who were unemployed at the time of the interview, adults with work-related asthma did not differ from those with non-work-related asthma in naming disability as reason for unemployment (PR = 1.09; 95% CI = 0.94-1.26). However, those with work-related asthma were more likely to be unable to work for health reasons other than disability (PR = 1.46; 95% CI = 1.01-2.12) than adults with non-work-related asthma. Conclusions: Additional studies are needed to determine what health reasons prevent individuals with work-related asthma from working and if the health reasons are asthma-related.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available