Risk factors for Raynaud's phenomenon in the workforce: the French Pays de la Loire study. (19th October 2011)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Roquelaure, Yves; Ha, Catherine; Le Manac'h, Audrey Petit; Bodin, Julie; Descatha, Alexis; Leclerc, Annette; Goldberg, Marcel; Imbernon, Ellen
• Is Part Of: Occupational and environmental medicine. Volume 68(2011)Supplement 1
• Page Start: A74
• Page End: A74
• Publication Date: 2011-10-19
• Subjects: Medicine, Industrial -- Periodicals; Environmental health -- Periodicals; 616.980305
• DOI: 10.1136/oemed-2011-100382.240
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1351-0711

Abstract

Abstract : Objectives: To assess the prevalence and risk factors for Raynaud's phenomenon (RP) in a general French working population characterised by various levels of exposure to work-related constraints. Methods: The study population comprised 3710 workers (2161 men, 1549 women, mean age = 38.7 years) out of 184 600 followed by 83 occupational physicians. RP, diagnosed by (Nordic) questionnaire and standardised interview, was defined as the "occurrence of at least occasional attacks of finger blanching triggered by exposure to environmental cold" during the past 12 months. Personal factors and work exposure were assessed by self-administered questionnaires Associations between RP and personal and occupational factors were analysed using logistic regression modeling. Results: A total of 87 cases of RP (56 women, 31 men) were diagnosed. The population-based annual prevalence rates of RP were 3.6% for females and 1.4% for males. Women were at higher risk (OR 2.6 95% CI (1.6 to 4.1)) and obese workers at lower risk (OR 0.3 (0.1 to 1.1)). The risk of RP increased consistently but moderately with age after 35 years (OR ranging from 1.8 (1.0 to 3.4) and 2.4 (1.3 to 4.2)). Among the work-related factors studied, RP was associated with the exposure to cold environment or objects (OR 2.1 (1.0 to 4.5)), high repetitiveness of the task (OR 1.7 (1.0 to 2.7)), high psychological demand at work (OR 1.7 (1.0 to 2.7)) and low support from supervisors (OR 2.3 (1.4 to 3.7)). Conclusions: RP was associated with both personal and work-related factors in the working population. Psychosocial factors at work played a significant role, independently of the biomechanical and environmental exposure.