Background: Work-related stress and its causes are among the most important issues which can seriously challenge organizational efficiency and employees' health. Different occupational environments and groups have different levels of job stress. The present study aimed to investigate relationships between job stress and its dimensions with three occupational groups (administrative, administrative-operational, and operational) among a subsidiary company workers of Iranian Oil Refining and Distribution Company.Methods: The present study had descriptive-analytical and cross-sectional type and was conducted among 468 out of 503 employees (with entry condition of a year of work experience as well as an official and contractual membership) volunteered to participate in research. Data collection tools included demographic questions and job stress questionnaire as well as human resource department information to determine occupational group of employees. Descriptive statistics, statistical tests, Independent test, and one-way ANOVA in addition to SPSS 21 software were used for data analysis.Results: There were significant relationships between age, education levels, work experience and smoking with mean score of job stress (P-value <0.05). Mean score of employees' job stress in operational occupation group was significantly higher than other two occupational groups (P-value=0.004), and there were significant relationships between employees' occupational group variables with five dimensions of job stress (demand, relationships and role, managerial support, and peer support) (P-value<0.05). There were not any significant relationships between other variables and job stress (P-value>0.05).Conclusion: Exposure to different occupational harmful agents, facing with different safety risks, being far from family, heavy workload, and uncertain employee roles have significantly increased job stress in both operational and executive occupation groups compared to other two occupational groups; hence, there is a positive correlation between high job stress and operational jobs.

BACKGROUND: Automated office blood pressure (AOBP) machines measure blood pressure (BP) multiple times over a brief period. We aimed to compare the results of manual office blood pressure (MOBP) and AOBP methods with ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). METHODS: This study was performed on 64 patients with CKD (stages 3–4). A nurse manually measured the BP on both arms using a mercury sphygmomanometer, followed by AOBP of the arm with the higher BP and then ABPM. Mean BP readings were compared by paired t test and Bland–Altman graphs. RESULTS: The mean ± standard deviation (SD) age of participants was 59.3 ± 13.6. The mean ± SD awake systolic BP obtained by ABPM was 140.2 ± 19.0 mmHg, which was lower than the MOBP and AOBP methods (156.6 ± 17.8 and 148.8 ± 18.6 mmHg, respectively; P < 0.001). The mean ± SD awake diastolic BP was 78.6 ± 13.2 mmHg by ABPM which was lower than the MOBP and AOBP methods (88.9 ± 13.2 and 84.1 ± 14.0 mmHg, respectively; P < 0.001). Using Bland–Altman graphs, MOBP systolic BP readings showed a bias of 16.4 mmHg, while AOBP measurements indicated a bias of 8.6 mmHg compared with ABPM. CONCLUSION: AOBP methods may be more reliable than MOBP methods for determining BP in patients with CKD. However, the significantly higher mean BPs recorded by AOBP method suggested that AOBPs may not be as accurate as ABPM in patients with CKD.
Arm ; Bias (Epidemiology) ; Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory ; Blood Pressure ; Humans ; Hypertension ; Methods ; Reading ; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic ; Sphygmomanometers