Occupational Difference in Association of Poor Sleep Quality and Metabolic Syndrome: Differences between Workers and Employees
Table 4
Crude and adjusted risk of metabolic syndrome for each increase score of sleep quality components in workers and employees.
Workers
Employees
Crude risk
Adjusted risk†
Crude risk
Adjusted risk†
Poor sleep quality
2.76 (1.32-5.74)
3.04 (1.27-7.31)
1.27 (0.74-2.15)
1.48 (0.79-2.76)
Subjective sleep quality
1.89 (1.15-3.09)
2.29 (1.22-4.28)
0.92 (0.61-1.38)
1.01 (0.63-1.60)
Sleep latency
1.61 (1.02-2.55)
2.42 (1.31-4.49)
1.05 (0.74-1.49)
1.08 (0.72-1.62)
Sleep disturbances
2.59 (1.32-5.08)
2.43 (1.13-5.19)
1.54 (0.89-2.65)
1.19 (0.65-2.17)
Daytime dysfunction
1.66 (1.06-2.60)
2.06 (1.20-3.53)
0.81 (0.58-1.14)
0.80 (0.54-1.18)
Habitual sleep efficiency
0.64 (0.20-2.01)
0.68 (0.19-2.33)
1.36 (0.76-2.43)
1.74 (0.88-3.41)
Sleep duration
1.11 (0.74-1.68)
1.19 (0.69-2.06)
1.20 (0.87-1.66)
1.21 (0.84-1.76)
Using sleep medications
0.98 (0.51-1.88)
1.13 (0.54-2.36)
1.16 (0.70-1.93)
0.82 (0.43-1.55)
Analysis was performed using logistic regression with metabolic syndrome as a dependent factor. †Adjusted for age, gender, BMI, shift work, and education. and .
