September 13th, 2012

Meta-Analysis Links Stress at Work and Heart Disease

A new study in the Lancet provides the best evidence yet that work-related stress and, in particular, job strain — “the combination of high job demands and low control at work” — plays a small but important role in causing heart disease. In order to address the limitations of previous studies on this topic, including a publication bias which might exaggerate the effect, European investigators performed a large collaborative meta-analysis of published and unpublished studies.

The IPD-Work (individual-participant-data meta-analysis in working populations) consortium found that 15% of nearly 200,000 individuals reported having job strain. With a mean follow-up of 7.5 years, job strain was significantly associated with increased risk for heart disease. The effect was higher in published studies, though it still achieved significance in the unpublished studies:

  • Overall hazard ratio (HR) for job strain: 1.23,CI 1.10–1.37
  • HR in published studies: 1.43, CI 1.15−1.77
  • HR in unpublished studies: 1.16, CI 1.02−1.32

The investigators calculated that the population attributable risk for job strain was 3.4%, which, they noted, was substantially lower than the major risk factors of smoking, obesity, and physical inactivity.

“Our findings suggest that job strain is associated with a small, but consistent, increased risk of an incident event of cardiovascular heart disease,” they concluded.

In an accompanying comment, Bo Netterstrøm writes that “job strain is a measure of only part of a psychosocially damaging work environment, which implies that prevention of workplace stress could reduce incidence of coronary heart disease to a greater extent than stated in the authors’ interpretation of the calculated population-attributable risk for job strain.”

3 Responses to “Meta-Analysis Links Stress at Work and Heart Disease”

  1. Karen Politis, MD says:

    What worries me, more than the slightly increased risk for heart diasease, is the prospect of having a miserable life of high demands and low control at work.

  2. Lillian Rhoades, AAS says:

    I would like to know the age group of those studied at the time the study began and when it was completed. I think the age factor before and after, along with other risk factors, would impact the results.

  3. Jean-Pierre Usdin, MD says:

    in fact this study (1985-2006) does not take into consideration the increasing burden of laptop and e mail schedule which are part in-office and out-of office job.
    next studies should consider home[computer]work as an unavoidable job strain.