A Study of the Relationship between Drinking, Smoking and Stress of Workers by Analyzing Heart Rate Variability

(1)

서 론

1)

.

2)

.

3)

.

2008 2 18

2008 3 7

,

(Tel:+82-53-770-2107, Fax:+82-53-770-2055, E-mail:[email protected])

박영선, 김석중, 김종대

Original Article

A Study of the Relationship between Drinking, Smoking and Stress of Workers by Analyzing Heart Rate Variability

Young-Sun Park, Seuk-Jung Kim, Jong-Dae Kim

Daegu Oriental Hospital of Daeguhaany University

Objectives : This study investigated the relationship between drinking, smoking and stress of workers by analyzing heart rate variability. The subjects were workers in the automobile manufacturing industry.

Methods : The subjects consisted of 21,239 and 19,999 industrial workers who had received health examination by Korean oriental medicine and submitted questionnaires about drinking history and smoking history, during 8 months from April to November. The subjects were categorized into drinking history and smoking history. The heart rate variability was measured for five minute at rest using SA-3000P (Medicore) and reported stress severity as stress index, stress resistance and fatigue. We analyzed the relationship between drinking, smoking and stress into frequencies, χ2-test using the SPSS Ver. 12.0.

Results : Regarding the relationship between drinking and stress index orstress resistance, there was no statistically significant difference, but regarding the relationship between drinking and fatigue, the drinker group had a significantly higher level of fatigue than the non-drinker group.

There was a statistically significant difference in stress index, stress resistance and fatigue between the current- smoker group and others. Stress resistance of the current-smoker group had lower levels than the non-smoker group or ex-smokers. On the other hand, stress index and fatigue of the current-smoker group had higher levels than the non-smoker group or ex-smokers.

Conclusions : The above results revealed that drinking and smoking could put workers under a lot of stress.

Smoking workers were especially apt to be under stress and had difficulty in alleviating stress.

Key Words : Drinking, smoking, stress index, stress resistance, fatigue, heart rate variability (HRV).

(2)

,

4)

.

,

5)

.

,

6)

. (heart rate variability, HRV)

,

7-8)

.

8-11)

.

,

2005 4

2005 11 ( )

.

대상 및 방법

1.

연구대상 및 내용

2005 4 11 8

( )

, 25,393

4,154 5,394 21,239 19,999

.

, , ,

, SA-3000P (Med-

icore, Seoul, Korea)

, ,

.

2.

연구도구 및 측정방법

1)

,

.

, ,

. 2)

SA-3000P 5

.

Medicore

, ,

. (stress index):

(frequency domain parameters) HRT(heart

rate) (time domain parameters)

(3)

SDNN(standard deviation of all normal NN interval)

· .

(stress resistance):

SDNN

.

· .

: TP(total power)

LF(low frequency) .

.

3.

자료 분석

1) ,

,

‘ ’, ‘ ’, ‘ ’, ‘ ’, ‘ ’

5 .

2) :

, ,

. SPSS Version 12.0

for windows ,

p<0.05 .

연구 결과

1.

대상자의 일반적 특성

97.9%, 2.5% ,

41.7±6.66 20 7.7%, 30 23.8%, 40

58.4%, 50 10.1% .

14.8% 68.9%

,

16.3% .

36.9% ,

26.7%, 15.2%,

21.2% (Table 1).

N %

Sex Male 24,759 97.5

Female 634 2.5

Age(years)

20~29 1,957 7.7

30~39 6,032 23.8

40~49 14,841 58.4

50~59 2,563 10.1

Drinking status

Drinker 17,484 68.9

Non-drinker 3,755 14.8

No answer 4,154 16.3

Smoking status

Non-smoker 6,782 26.7

Current-smoker 9,361 36.9

Ex-smoker 3,856 15.2

No answer 5,394 21.2

Total 25,393 100

: Number

Table 1.

(4)

2.

음주력 및 흡연력과 과거력의 관계

,

.

,

, ,

(Table 2, 3).

3.

스트레스 지수

1)

(Table 4).

2)

‘ ’, ‘ ’

4.2%, 11.8% , ‘ ’, ‘ ’,

‘ ’ 66.3%, 14.5%, 3.2%

(Table 5).

LD CVD DTD RD DUS

^∫

HT

^∬

Stroke DM Cancer Other Total

Non- drinker

N Row(%) Column(%)

138 15.4 18.6

20 2.2 26.7

237 26.5 23.0

114 12.7 20.6

42 4.7 22.0

97 10.8 17.6

14 1.6 28.0

59 6.6 21.7

53 5.9 59.6

122 13.6 23.4

896 100.0

22.0 Drinker N Row(%) Column(%)

603 19.0 81.4

55 1.7 73.3

794 25.0 77.0

439 13.8 79.4

149 4.7 78.0

454 13.4 82.4

36 1.1 72.0

213 6.7 78.3

36 1.1 40.4

399 12.6 76.6

3,178 100.0 78.0

Total N Row(%) Column(%)

741 18.2 100.0

75 1.8 100.0

1,031 25.3 100.0

553 13.6 100.0

191 4.7 100.0

551 13.5 100.0

50 1.2 100.0

272 6.7 100.0

89 2.2 100.0

521 12.8 100.0

4,074 100.0 100.0 χ

²

-test: 88.108 ( ν=9), p-value:0.000

: Liver disease, : Cardiovascular disease, : Digestive tract disease, : Respiratory disease,

∫

: Disorders of urinary system,

^∬

:Hypertension, : Diabetes mellitus Table 2.

LD CVD DTD RD DUS HT Stroke DM Cancer Other Total

Non- smoker

N Row(%) Column(%)

234 17.7 34.7

24 1.8 33.8

302 22.8 31.8

189 14.3 37.1

62 4.7 34.3

211 15.9 42.2

12 0.9 33.3

82 6.2 33.2

45 3.4 54.2

164 12.4 37.0

1325 100.0 35.8 Current-s

moker

N Row(%) Column(%)

316 20.4 46.8

30 1.9 42.3

415 26.8 43.7

195 12.6 38.2

78 5.0 43.1

174 11.2 34.8

17 1.1 47.2

123 7.9 49.8

18 1.2 21.7

183 11.8 41.3

1549 100.0 41.9 Ex-

smoker N Row(%) Column(%)

125 15.2 18.5

17 2.1 23.9

233 28.3 24.5

126 15.3 24.7

41 5.0 22.7

115 14.0 23.0

7 0.9 19.4

42 5.1 17.0

20 2.4 24.1

96 11.7 21.7

822 100.0

22.2 Total

N Row(%) Column(%)

675 18.3 100.0

71 1.9 100.0

950 25.7 100.0

510 13.8 100.0

181 4.9 100.0

500 13.5 100.0

36 1.0 100.0

247 6.7 100.0

83 2.2 100.0

443 12.0 100.0

3696 100.0 100.0 χ

²

-test: 55.007 ( ν=18), p-value: 0.000

Table 3.

(5)

4.

스트레스 저항도 1)

(Table 6).

2)

‘ ’ 72.8%,

72.7% ‘ ’ 68.3%

.

‘ ’ ‘ ’ 9.1%, 14.8%

7.5%, 13.2% , ‘ ’

‘ ’ 4.3%, 3.4%

5.0%, 3.7% (Table 7).

Stress index

Total

VB BS NS

^♭

GS* VG

^$

Non- drinker

N 114 368 2,564 564 145 3,755

Row(%) 3.0 9.8 68.3 15.0 3.9 100.0

Column(%) 17.0 17.6 17.9 16.7 19.0 17.7

Drinker

N 556 1,718 11,775 2,817 618 17,484

Row(%) 3.2 9.8 67.3 16.1 3.5 100.0

Column(%) 83.0 82.4 82.1 83.3 81.0 82.3

Total

N 670 2,086 14,339 3,381 763 21,239

Row(%) 3.2 9.8 67.5 15.9 3.6 100.0

Column(%) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

χ

²

-test p-value: 0.428

: Very bad state, : Bad state, ♭: Normal state, *: Good state, $: Very good state Table 4.

Stress index

Total

VB BS NS GS VG

Non- smoker

N 155 560 4,688 1,122 257 6,782

Row(%) 2.3 8.3 69.1 16.5 3.8 100

Column(%) 24.7 28.6 34.7 35.2 35.7 33.9

Current- smoker

N 391 1,107 6,209 1,357 297 9,361

Row(%) 4.2 11.8 66.3 14.5 3.2 100

Column(%) 62.3 56.6 46.0 42.6 41.3 46.8

Ex- smoker

N 82 289 2,611 708 166 3,856

Row(%) 2.1 7.5 67.7 18.4 4.3 100

Column(%) 13.1 14.8 19.3 22.2 23.1 19.3

Total

N 628 1,956 13,508 3,187 720 19,999

Row(%) 3.1 9.8 67.5 15.9 3.6 100

Column(%) 100 100 100 100 100 100

χ

²

-test p-value: 0.000

Table 5.

(6)

5.

피로도 1)

‘ ’ 8.2%, ‘ ’

36.6%, ‘ ’ 42.6%, ‘ ’ 5.5%, ‘ ’

7.1% . ‘

’ 8.1%

6.9% ,

(Table 8).

2)

‘

’, ‘ ’ 9.6%, 38.8%

, ‘ ’, ‘ ’, ‘ ’

Stress resistance

Total

VB BS NS GS VG

Non- drinker

N 277 495 2,646 203 134 3,755

Row(%) 7.4 13.2 70.5 5.4 3.6 100.0

Column(%) 17.4 17.3 17.7 19.2 17.4 17.7

Drinker

N 1,319 2,373 12,302 852 638 17,484

Row(%) 7.5 13.6 70.4 4.9 3.6 100.0

Column(%) 82.6 82.7 82.3 80.8 82.6 82.3

Total

N 1,596 2,868 14,948 1,055 772 21,239

Row(%) 7.5 13.5 70.4 5.0 3.6 100.0

Column(%) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

χ

²

-test p-value: 0.682 Table 6.

Stress resistance

Total

VB BS NS GS VG

Non- smoker

N 437 790 4,936 349 270 6,782

Row(%) 6.4 11.6 72.8 5.1 4.0 100.0

Current- smoker

Column(%) 29.0 30.0 34.9 35.1 36.9 33.9

N 854 1,390 6,391 405 321 9,361

Row(%) 9.1 14.8 68.3 4.3 3.4 100.0

Ex- smoker

Column(%) 56.6 52.8 45.2 40.7 43.9 46.8

N 218 455 2,802 241 140 3,856

Row(%) 5.7 11.8 72.7 6.3 3.6 100.0

Total

Column(%) 14.4 17.3 19.8 24.2 19.2 19.3

N 1,509 2,635 14,129 995 731 19,999

Row(%) 7.5 13.2 70.6 5.0 3.7 100.0

Column(%) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

χ

²

-test p-value: 0.000

Table 7.

(7)

40.3%, 5.2%, 6.0%

.

(Table 9).

고 찰

,

12)

.

13)

. Fatigue

Total

VB BS NS GS VG

Non- drinker

N 310 1,402 1,541 198 304 3,755

Row(%) 8.3 37.3 41.0 5.3 8.1 100.0

Column(%) 17.5 18.1 17.0 17.0 20.2 17.7

Drinker

N 1,458 6,362 7,498 967 1,199 17,484

Row(%) 8.3 36.4 42.9 5.5 6.9 100.0

Column(%) 82.5 81.9 83.0 83.0 79.8 82.3

Total

N 1,768 7,764 9,039 1,165 1,503 21,239

Row(%) 8.3 36.6 42.6 5.5 7.1 100.0

Column(%) 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

χ

²

-test p-value: 0.035 Table 8.

Fatigue

Total

VB BS NS GS VG

Non- smoker

N 486 2,357 3,008 378 553 6,782

Row(%) 7.2 34.8 44.4 5.6 8.2 100

Column(%) 29.5 32.2 35.4 34.3 38.8 33.9

Current- smoker

N 900 3,635 3,777 489 560 9,361

Row(%) 9.6 38.8 40.3 5.2 6.0 100

Column(%) 54.6 49.7 44.4 44.3 39.3 46.8

Ex- smoker

N 262 1,322 1,723 236 313 3,856

Row(%) 6.8 34.3 44.7 6.1 8.1 100

Column(%) 15.9 18.1 20.3 21.4 21.9 19.3

Total

N 1,648 7,314 8,508 1,103 1,426 19,999

Row(%) 8.2 36.6 42.5 5.5 7.1 100

Column(%) 100 100 100 100 100 100

χ

²

-test p-value: 0.000

Table 9.

(8)

14)

.

3)

.

75%

15)

.

¹⁶⁾

· ,

¹⁷⁾

· .

.

,

5,18)

.

,

hsCRP

19)

. ,

, ,

20)

.

,

, , .

“ ”

, , ,

, , , , ,

21)

.

, ,

, , ,

,

22-23)

. ,

, ,

24)

. ,

, , ,

, ,

, , , ·

25)

.

26)

,

²⁷⁾

.

,

, ,

28)

.

,

6)

.

28)

.

(HRV)

, , ,

,

, , , ,

.

(9)

Mean HRT, SDNN, RMSSD

, TP, VLF, LF,

HF

²⁸⁾

.

( )

.

7-8)

.

Medicore ,

,

.

HRT SDNN

·

29)

.

SDNN

30)

. TP

LF

11)

.

97.9%, 2.5% ,

41.7±6.66 20 7.7%, 30

23.8%, 40 58.4%, 50 10.1% .

14.8% 68.9%

. 36.9% 2005

50.3%

³¹⁾

.

,

.

, ,

.

‘

’ 67.5% ,

‘ ’

70.6% , ‘ ’ ‘ ’ 8.6%

‘ ’ ‘ ’ 20%

.

32)

.

³³⁾ ³⁴⁾

.

‘ ’, ‘ ’ 4.2%, 11.8%

, ‘

’, ‘ ’, ‘ ’ 66.3%, 14.5%,

3.2% .

‘ ’ 72.8%,

72.7%

‘ ’ 68.3%

.

⁵⁾ ³⁵⁾

,

(10)

,

36)

.

‘ ’

8.2%, ‘ ’ 36.6%, ‘ ’ 42.6%, ‘ ’ 5.5%,

‘ ’ 7.1% .

‘ ’ 8.1%

6.9% ,

37)

.

‘ ’, ‘ ’

9.6%, 38.8%

, ‘ ’, ‘

’, ‘ ’

40.3%, 5.2%, 6.0%

.

, Hayano

³⁸⁾

Watanabe

³⁹⁾

40) 41)

.

, ,

,

.

, ,

,

, .

, ,

,

.

, ,

‘ ’, ‘ ’, ‘ ’, ‘

’, ‘ ’ 5

.

,

.

결 론

2005 4 11 8

( ) 25,393

21,239 19,999

. 1.

.

,

, .

2. ,

.

(11)

3. ,

. 4.

,

.

참고문헌

1. .

. . 2000;9

(1):30-38.

2. . :

. . 2006;214:2-3.

3. , , , , ,

, , , . Moire

. . 2000;4(2):72-92.

4. , , , , ,

.

. . 2003;

13(2):135-43.

5. , , , , .

, .

. 2006;19:31-50.

6. , , , .

(

). . 2005;19:269-87.

7. , , , , ,

, , .

. . 2005;14(4)220-7.

8. , , , , .

. . 2005;

22(6):173-80.

9. , , , , .

. . 2004;21

(5):227-239.

10. , , .

. . 2007;24(4):13-23.

11. , , , , ,

. HRV

. . 2007;24(5):1-12.

12. . (

). 1998:10-12.

13. .

. . 1992.

14. , , , , ,

.

. . 1999;

38(4):202-12.

15. .

. . 2001.

16. .

· .

. 2004;191(1):2-3.

17. , , , , ,

.

. . 1994;15(2):

9-26.

18. , , , , ,

, .

. . 2007;31(3):253-60.

19. , , , , .

hsCRP .

. 2007;28(10):768-73.

20. . .

. 2000;26(4):373-82.

(12)

21. . 102

( ). .

1996;17(2):318-30.

22. , , , , ,

.

. . 2006;27(11):911-6.

23. , , , , ,

, , , Chiharu Yoshii, .

Kano Test for Social Nicotine Dependence (KTSND-K)

. .

2007;62(5):365-73.

24. Baker F, Ainsworth SR, Dye JT, Grammer C, Thun MJ, Hoffmann D, et al. Health risks associated with cigar smoking. JAMA. 2000;

284:735-40.

25. . . :

. 1982:1542-3.

26. . . : . 1981:18-9.

27. . . : 1985:

263. 28. , , , .

- .

. 2007;228:16-22.

29. Task force of the European society of Cardio- logy and the north America society of pacing and electrophysiology. Heart rate variability:

standards of measurement, physiological inter- pretation and clinical use. European Heart J.

1996;17:354-81.

30. Bigger JT Jr, Fleiss JL, Steinman RC, Roln- itzky LM, Kleiqer RE, Rottman JN. Frequency domain measure of heart period variability and mortality after myocardial infarction. Circu- lation. 1992;85:164-71.

31. Korean association of smoking & health.

smoking and statistics. Available from: URL:

http://www.kash.or.kr/user_new/pds_view.as.

32. , , , , .

. . 2003;10(2):233-9.

33. . ,

. . 2000;12(1):26-40.

34. , , .

. . 1998;19(2):205-14.

35. , , , .

. . 2004;30(1):57-70.

36. .

, ,

. . 2001;22(12):1814-22.

37. , , Thomas Findley.

. . 2005;17(1):26-35.

38. Hayano J, Yamada M, Sakakibara Y, Fujinami T, Yokoyama K, Watanabe Y, Takata K. Short- and long-term effects of cigarette smoking on heart rate variability. Am J Cardiol. 1990;65(1):

84-8.

39. Watanabe T, Sugiyama Y, Sumi Y, Watanabe M, Takeuchi K, Kobayashi F, Kono K. Effects of vital exhaustion on cardiac autonomic nervous functions assessed by heart rate variability at rest in middle-aged male workers. Int J Behav Med. 2002;9(1):68-75.