Effects of psychosocial work factors and psychological distress on self-assessed work ability: A 7-year follow-up in a general working population.

BACKGROUND: Toinvestigate the effects of psychosocial work factors (PWF) and psychological distress (PD) on self-assessed work ability. METHODS: This follow-up study included 7,810 individuals (55%women) with good work ability at baseline. PWFandPD (measured by GHQ-12) were assessed at baseline and work ability at 7-year follow-up. Effects of PWF and PD on work ability were analyzed by logistic regression, odds ratios (OR) with 95% CI, and by mediation analysisusing 4-way decomposition. RESULTS: Low support was associated with poor work ability for both women and men (OR 1.78 and 1.89). For men, also low skill discretion was associated with poor work ability (OR 2.07). For both women and men, PD was associated with poor work ability (OR 3.41 and 1.84). PD did not act as an intermediate variablein the association between PWF and work ability. CONCLUSION: Strategies for sustainable work ability should focus on both working conditions and health factors. Am. J. Ind. Med. 60:121-130, 2017. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Unemployment Is a Risk Factor for Hospitalization Due to Alcohol Problems: A Longitudinal Study Based on the Stockholm Public Health Cohort (SPHC).

OBJECTIVE: This study examined the associations between unemployment and alcohol-related hospitalization or mortality and to what extent these associations may be confounded by alcohol consumption and alcohol problems before unemployment. METHOD: The study was based on the Stockholm Public Health Cohort (SPHC), a population-based stratified random sample with a baseline questionnaire in 2002/2003 and record linkages up to year 2011. The final sample in the study consists of 15,841 people aged 18-60 years. Unemployment was defined as any registration at the public employment services during 2003-2005. The outcome was alcohol-related hospitalization and alcohol-related mortality during 2006-2011. Confounders were age, sex, and education, and we further adjusted for baseline alcohol consumption and alcohol-related hospitalization before the study period. Cox proportional hazard models were fit, and associations were expressed as hazard ratios (HRs). RESULTS: In the fully adjusted model, unemployment was associated with an increased risk of alcohol-related hospitalization or mortality, with a more than threefold hazard (HR = 3.38, 95% CI [1.81, 6.31]) compared with no unemployment during the exposure period. There was a moderate attenuating effect of prior alcohol consumption and alcohol-related hospitalization. CONCLUSIONS: Any unemployment in 2003-2005 was highly related to having experienced an alcohol-related diagnosis during the 6-year follow-up, even after controlling for risky use of alcohol and prior hospitalization.

The use of alcohol use disorders identification test (AUDIT) in detecting alcohol use disorder and risk drinking in the general population: validation of AUDIT using schedules for clinical assessment in neuropsychiatry.

BACKGROUND: The alcohol use disorders identification test (AUDIT) and AUDIT-Consumption (AUDIT-C) are commonly used in population surveys but there are few validations studies in the general population. Validity should be estimated in samples close to the targeted population and setting. This study aims to validate AUDIT and AUDIT-C in a general population sample (PART) in Stockholm, Sweden. METHODS: We used a general population subsample age 20 to 64 that answered a postal questionnaire including AUDIT who later participated in a psychiatric interview (n = 1,093). Interviews using Schedules for Clinical Assessment in Neuropsychiatry was used as criterion standard. Diagnoses were set according to the fourth version of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV). Agreement between the diagnostic test and criterion standard was measured with area under the receiver operator characteristics curve (AUC). RESULTS: A total of 1,086 (450 men and 636 women) of the interview participants completed AUDIT. There were 96 individuals with DSM-IV-alcohol dependence, 36 DSM-IV-Alcohol Abuse, and 153 Risk drinkers. AUCs were for DSM-IV-alcohol use disorder 0.90 (AUDIT-C 0.85); DSM-IV-dependence 0.94 (AUDIT-C 0.89); risk drinking 0.80 (AUDIT-C 0.80); and any criterion 0.87 (AUDIT-C 0.84). CONCLUSIONS: In this general population sample, AUDIT and AUDIT-C performed outstanding or excellent in identifying dependency, risk drinking, alcohol use disorder, any disorder, or risk drinking.