Background Unhealthy lifestyle behaviors may be associated with an increased risk of cardiometabolic risk factor aggregation (CMRF≥ 2), and few studies have focused on the correlation between the two in occupational populations. Objective To investigate the current status of CMRF≥2 and the compliance of healthy lifestyle in male occupational personnel, explore the effect of lifestyle on cardiometabolic risk, and provide reference for formulating healthy behavior promotion strategies and reducing cardiometabolic risk in occupational populations. Methods The study subjects were selected from male workers who completed occupational health examinations at an occupational disease prevention and control hospital in Shanxi Province from May to December 2023, and 15125 study subjects aged 18−60 years were finally included according to pre-determined inclusion and exclusion criteria. All subjects received a series of assessments including questionnaires (basic information, lifestyle habits, and occupational factors), physical examination, laboratory tests, and six cardiometabolic risk factors (central obesity, hypertension, type 2 diabetes, hypertriglyceridemia, low-density lipoprotein cholesterolemia, and hyperuricemia). A healthy lifestyle score was calculated based on six behavioral factors (smoking, drinking, physical activity, diet, sleep, sedentary behavior) and 1 point for one positive healthy behavior. The enrolled workers were then divided into three groups according to their total scores: 0−1 points (poor group), 2−3 points (moderate group), and 4−6 points (good group). Logistic regression models were used to analyze the statistical associations between lifestyle and CMRF≥2. Results The median age of the 15125 male study participants was 40 years, and the positive rate of CMRF≥2 was 53.5%. Adherence to moderate alcohol consumption was the most compliant healthy behavior (79.4%), followed by current non-smoking (41.7%), while adherence to adequate sedentary behavior (23.6%) and healthy eating (21.1%) were relatively low, and only 17.4% were able to adhere to four or more healthy lifestyle behaviors. After adjusting for confounders, when compared with the poor group high lifestyle score was found to be a protective factor for CMRF≥2 (moderate group: OR=0.70, 95%CI: 0.63, 0.77; good group: OR=0.66, 95%CI: 0.58, 0.75). In stratified analyses across different job types (coal miners, auxiliary workers, ground workers, and others), occupational stress (with or without), shift patterns (day shift, night shift, or rotating shift), dust exposure (with or without), and noise exposure (with or without), individuals with higher lifestyle scores exhibited a consistently lower risk of CMRF≥2. There was an interaction between shift pattern and lifestyle on CMRF≥2 (P_interaction<0.05). Conclusion This occupational group has a high positive rate of CMRF≥2 and a high prevalence of poor lifestyles with low adherence to some healthy behaviors. High healthy lifestyle scores are associated with a lower risk of aggregation of cardiometabolic risk factors, which may be reduced through lifestyle interventions.

Background Hand-arm vibration disease is harmful to human body, but there are no effective diagnosis and treatment so far, and current occupational exposure limits underestimate the health damage caused by high-frequency vibration exposure. Objective To evaluate and compare the damage to workers' peripheral circulation and peripheral nerve caused by different frequencies of vibration operation. Methods Drilling workers (n=187) from a mining company in Shandong Province and golf club head grinding workers (n=228) from a sports equipment factory in Guangdong Province were selected as study subjects. Hand symptoms were investigated. SV106 vibration meter was used to measure the target operation-associated vibration frequency spectrum. The 8 h energy-equivalent frequency weighted acceleration, cumulative vibration exposure level (CVEL), and the working age related to causing white finger in 10% of an exposed group were calculated. Result The study subjects were all male. More grinding workers reported hand symptoms than the drilling workers, e.g. peripheral circulation injury (52.6% vs 19.3%), peripheral nerve injury (71.5% vs 23.0%), hand stiffness (64.0% vs 7.0%), and deformed fingers (69.7% vs 4.3%) (all P<0.001). The main vibration frequencies of grinding operation (500-800 Hz) were much higher than those of drilling operation (125~160 Hz). CVEL and working age of vibration exposure showed a linear rising relationship with the cumulative prevalence rate of peripheral circulation and peripheral never injury, the fitting lines all showed good fitting effects (R²=0.812-0.988), and the slope of the fitting line of the grinding workers was larger than that of the drilling workers. The working age of vibration exposure associated with 10% cumulative prevalence of white finger was shorter in the grinding workers than in the drilling workers (6.81 years vs 10.27 years). According to the ISO prediction formula, the working age of vibration exposure was associated with 10% white finger prevalence shorter in the drilling workers than in the grinding workers (3.12 years vs 8.23 years). Conclusion Both the vibration exposure level and the prevalence of hand symptoms are high in two groups of workers with different vibration frequencies, and vibration exposure at a higher frequency tends to have severer damage to workers' hands.