Affordable Access

Access to the full text

Exposure to occupational hazards for pregnancy and sick leave in pregnant workers: a cross-sectional study

Authors
  • Henrotin, Jean-Bernard1
  • Vaissière, Monique2
  • Etaix, Maryline3
  • Dziurla, Mathieu1
  • Malard, Stéphane4
  • Lafon, Dominique5
  • 1 National Research and Safety Institute, Department of Occupational Epidemiology, 1 rue du Morvan, CS 60027, Vandoeuvre-les-Nancy, 54519 Cedex, France , Vandoeuvre-les-Nancy (France)
  • 2 Occupational Health Service, Santé Travail Béziers Coeur d’Hérault, Béziers, France , Béziers (France)
  • 3 Occupational Health Service, Santé Travail Loire Nord, Roanne, France , Roanne (France)
  • 4 National Research and Safety Institute, Department of Medical Studies and Assistance, Paris, France , Paris (France)
  • 5 Occupational Disease Consultation Centre, Raymond Poincaré Hospital, Garches, France , Garches (France)
Type
Published Article
Journal
Annals of Occupational and Environmental Medicine
Publisher
BioMed Central
Publication Date
May 15, 2017
Volume
29
Issue
1
Identifiers
DOI: 10.1186/s40557-017-0170-3
Source
Springer Nature
Keywords
License
Green

Abstract

BackgroundThis study aimed to investigate the association between exposure to occupational hazards for pregnancy and sick leave (SL) in pregnant workers.MethodsA cross-sectional study was performed in French occupational health services in 2014. Occupational hazards for pregnancy were assessed by occupational health physicians (OHPs). After delivery and at the time of returning to work, 1,495 eligible workers were interviewed by OHPs. Information on SL was self-reported. Risk ratios (RRs) were calculated from multivariable analyses based on a generalized linear model with a Bernoulli distribution and a log link adjusted for selected confounders for binary outcomes or zero-inflated negative binomial regression for count outcomes.ResultsAmong recruited workers, 74.9% presented “at least one SL” during pregnancy. After adjustment, the cumulative index of occupational hazards (0, 1–2, 3–4, ≥ 5 risks) for pregnancy was significantly associated with “at least one SL” during pregnancy in a dose–response relationship. This gradient was also observed with “early SL” (<15 week gestation): from 1 to 2 risks, RR = 1.48 (95% confidence intervals (CIs): 0.92-2.38); from 3 to 4 risks, RR = 2.03 (95% CI: 1.25-3.30); equal to or higher than five risks, RR = 2.90 (95% CI: 1.89-4.44); with “duration of absence” (adjusted mean): from 1 to 2 risks, m = 38.6 days; from 3 to 4 risks, m = 46.8 days; equal to or higher than five risks, m = 53.8 days. We also found that deprivation, pregnancy at risk, assisted reproductive therapy, work-family conflicts, home-work commuting felt as difficult and young age are associated with a higher risk of SL.ConclusionsOur results support the assertion that pregnant workers exposed to occupational hazards for pregnancy without medical complications are also at risk of taking SL during pregnancy. More prevention in the workplace for pregnant workers exposed to occupational hazards could reduce SL.

Report this publication

Statistics

Seen <100 times