Whitehall Study

Last updated

The Whitehall Studies investigated social determinants of health, specifically the cardiovascular disease prevalence and mortality rates among British civil servants. The initial prospective cohort study, the Whitehall I Study, [1] examined over 17,500 male civil servants between the ages of 20 and 64, and was conducted over a period of ten years, beginning in 1967. A second cohort study, the Whitehall II Study, [2] was conducted from 1985 to 1988 and examined the health of 10,308 civil servants aged 35 to 55, of whom two thirds were men and one third women. A long-term follow-up of study subjects from the first two phases is ongoing.

Contents

The studies, named after the Whitehall area of London and originally led by Michael Marmot, found a strong association between grade levels of civil servant employment and mortality rates from a range of causes: the lower the grade, the higher the mortality rate. Men in the lowest grade (messengers, doorkeepers, etc.) had a mortality rate three times higher than that of men in the highest grade (administrators). This effect has since been observed in other studies and named the "status syndrome". [3]

Whitehall I

The first Whitehall Study compared mortality of people in the highly stratified environment of the British Civil Service. It showed that among British civil servants, mortality was higher among those in the lower grade when compared to the higher grade. The more senior one was in the employment hierarchy, the longer one might expect to live compared to people in lower employment grades.[ citation needed ]

The first of the Whitehall studies, or Whitehall I, found higher mortality rates due to all causes for men of lower employment grade. The study also revealed a higher mortality rate specifically due to coronary heart disease for men in the lower employment grade when compared to men in higher grades.[ citation needed ]

The initial Whitehall study found lower grades, and thus status, were clearly associated with higher prevalence of significant risk factors. These risk factors include obesity, smoking, reduced leisure time, lower levels of physical activity, higher prevalence of underlying illness, higher blood pressure, and shorter height. Controlling for these risk factors accounted for no more than forty percent of differences between civil service grades in cardiovascular disease mortality. After controlling for these risk factors, the lowest grade still had a relative risk of 2.1 for cardiovascular disease mortality compared to the highest grade.

Whitehall I was carried out by the Department of Medical Statistics & Epidemiology at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine and published in 1987. [4] The Whitehall Study papers are available to view at the School's archives. [5]

Whitehall II

Twenty years later, the Whitehall II study documented a similar gradient in morbidity in women as well as men. The name Whitehall II was derived from the previous Whitehall study. The Whitehall Studies revealed this social gradient for a range of different diseases: heart disease, some cancers, chronic lung disease, gastrointestinal disease, depression, suicide, sickness absence, back pain and general feelings of ill-health. A major challenge, and a reason for the importance of these studies, was to understand the causes of this social distribution of so many disorders.[ citation needed ]

Whitehall II is a longitudinal, prospective cohort study of 10,308 women and men, all of whom were employed in the London offices of the British Civil Service at the time they were recruited to the study in 1985. The Study is led by Professor Mika Kivimaki at University College London. The initial data collection included a clinical examination and self-report questionnaire. Since then, twelve waves of data collection have been completed: phase 1 (1984-1985; age 35 to 55), phase 2 (1989-1990), phase 3 (1991-1993), phase 4 (1995-1996), phase 5 (1997-1999), phase 6 (2001), phase 7 (2002-2004), phase 8 (2006), phase 9 (2007-2009), phase 10 (2011), phase 11 (2012-2013), phase 12 (2015-2016). The thirteenth wave began in February 2019. Researchers are continuing to collect further data and samples from the cohort.[ citation needed ]

PhaseDateAge
Phase 11985-198835 to 55
Phase 21989-199037 to 60
Phase 31991-199439 to 64
Phase 41995-199642 to 65
Phase 51997-199945 to 69
Phase 6200148 to 71
Phase 72002-200450 to 74
Phase 8200653 to 76
Phase 92007-200955 to 80
Phase 10201157 to 82
Phase 112012-201358 to 83
Phase 122015-201661 to 86
Phase 132019-202064 to 89

Research continues to explore the pathways and mechanisms through which social position influences health. The research group aims to build a causal model leading from social position through psychosocial and behavioural pathways to pathophysiological changes, sub-clinical markers of disease, functional change, and clinical disease.

The Whitehall II study began as a study of working age people and investigated the relationships between work, stress, and health. Whitehall II found that the way work is organised, the work climate, social influences outside work, influences from early life, and health behaviours all contribute to the social gradient in health. As participants in this study continue through adult life, the research focuses on inequalities in health and functioning in an aging population. With an increasingly large population of older citizens in the UK, there is an urgent need to identify the causes of social inequalities and to study the long-term effects of previous circumstances on people's ability to function and stay healthy during retirement. Researchers in the Whitehall II team are also considering the role of social inequalities in relation to dementia risk.

Data sharing

The Whitehall II team have a data sharing policy, allowing researchers from other institutions to use data from the Whitehall II cohort. [6] There is a slightly different data sharing policy for projects that involve genetic information. This policy suggests that the team are engaging with the open access movement, a social movement which is gaining momentum in academia.[ citation needed ]

International impact

The social gradient in health is not a phenomenon confined to the British Civil Service. Throughout the developed world, wherever researchers have had data to investigate, they have observed the social gradient in health. In order to address inequalities in health, it is necessary both to understand how social organisation affects health, and to find ways to improve the conditions in which people work and live.[ citation needed ]

Michael Marmot chaired the World Health Organization's Commission on Social Determinants of Health (CSDH), which was established in 2005 and launched its final report in August 2008. [7] The Commission sought to engage with policy makers, global institutions, and civil society on the issues around health inequalities within and between countries, the social determinants of health, and act to address those issues. The CSDH acted as a catalyst for change, working with countries, academics, and civil society to bring health inequalities to the fore in the national policy dialogue. The overarching goals of the CSDH were to improve population health, to reduce health inequities, and to reduce disadvantages due to ill health.[ citation needed ]

Health risks associated with disparities of wealth and power

By design, the Whitehall studies have been focused upon a single set of related occupations, where the people within each occupational grade tend to be socially similar, yet clear social distinctions between grades are inherent. The studies were designed in this manner as an attempt to avoid certain research drawbacks associated with generalized social class groupings—drawbacks that otherwise would result from the diversity of occupations within social classes—which in turn would tend to reduce the objectivity of any analysis.

The primary health risks under investigation in the Whitehall studies include cardiovascular function, smoking, car ownership, angina, leisure and hobbies, ECG measurements, and diabetes.

High blood pressure at work was associated with greater "job stress," including "lack of skill utilization," "tension," and "lack of clarity" in tasks assigned. The higher blood pressure among the lowest grade servants was found to be related to the highest job stress score, whereas blood pressure at home was not related to job stress level.[ citation needed ]

According to Whitehall study researchers, "a steep inverse association between social class, as assessed by grade of employment, and mortality from a wide range of diseases" has been demonstrated. Summing up the moral of the Whitehall studies, the researchers concluded that "more attention should be paid to the social environments, job design, and the consequences of income inequality."[ citation needed ]

Explanations and implications

Subjects of Whitehall II in the lowest employment grades were more likely to have many of the established risk factors of coronary heart disease (CHD): a propensity to smoke, lower height-to-weight ratio, less leisure time, and higher blood pressure. However, even after normalizing for those factors, the lower employment grades were still at greater risk for a heart attack; another factor was at work. [1]

Some have pointed to cortisol, a hormone produced by the body as a response to stress. [8] An effect of cortisol release is a reduction in the immune system's efficacy through lymphocyte manipulation. One theory explaining the connection between immune-efficiency and CHD is that infectious pathogens, such as herpes or Chlamydia, are at least partially responsible for coronary diseases. Therefore, a body with a chronically suppressed immune system will be less able to prevent CHD. [2]

A study of the cortisol awakening response (the difference between cortisol levels upon awakening and thirty minutes later) further supports the significance of cortisol. Workers showed no significant difference in cortisol levels upon awakening, regardless of socioeconomic position. However, the lower employment grades showed significantly higher levels thirty minutes later, particularly if it was a workday. Researchers concluded that to be caused by chronic stress and its anticipation. [9]

This seems counter-intuitive: one usually thinks of those with the most decision-making responsibility as the ones with the most stressful lives. One theory is that the lower one is on the chain of command, the less control one has over his or her life. Not having to take orders on how to perform a task, or when to do it, results in lower heart rate, stress hormones, and blood pressure than being told how and when to perform it. [10]

This theory, however, is not without its detractors. A Finnish study conducted a cohort study similar to Whitehall, but with greater analysis of the worker's stress. The study determined that decision autonomy was not a significant contributing factor to coronary heart disease, but that lack of predictability in the workplace was a significant factor. In the Finnish study, "predictability" was defined as high stability of work and lack of unexpected changes, and was found to correlate closely to employment grade. [11]

Others argue that because there is a strong correlation between low employment grade and domestic stress, stress from a lack of control at work cannot be the whole story. [12] In this line of reasoning, the size of one's paycheck alone could significantly contribute to overall stress. Those with fewer resources have a harder time making ends meet, a situation that can be a tremendous source of chronic anxiety.

Adding to the controversy is the disagreement over the cortisol explanation in the first place. The theory is based on a pathogenic contribution to coronary heart disease and the stressed body's inability to fight it. Follow-up studies on the Whitehall II cohort failed to demonstrate a correlation between pathogen burden and socioeconomic status, [13] whereas other studies in different parts of the world have. [14]

An alternative to the cortisol explanation is that self-esteem is the major contributing factor and that the link between professional achievement and self-esteem accounts for the health gradient. [15] The study supporting this view correlated low self-esteem in test subjects with greater reductions in heart rate variability and higher heart rates in general—both established coronary heart disease risk factors—while performing stressful tasks.

Currently there is no universally-accepted cause for the phenomenon brought to light by the Whitehall studies. Clearly, stress is associated with a higher risk of coronary heart disease, but so are many other non-traditional factors. Furthermore, "stress" seems to be too nonspecific. There are different kinds of stress in one's day-to-day life and each kind could contribute differently. Vaananen, et al., are making great headway in this regard by researching which components of stress are responsible and which are not.[ citation needed ]

Regardless of the exact reason why coronary heart disease is more prevalent in lower employment grades, the results of the Whitehall studies have significantly changed the way some doctors approach the evaluation of heart disease risk. By recognizing the effects of psychosocial stressors on the body, in addition to the traditional risk factors, physicians can offer a better assessment of a patient's health. [16]

Direction

Professor Sir Michael Marmot of the Department of Epidemiology and Public Health at University College London initiated the Whitehall II study. It is now directed by Professor Mika Kivimaki. Marmot was the commissioner of the World Health Organization's Commission on Social Determinants of Health. [7]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Cardiovascular disease</span> Class of diseases that involve the heart or blood vessels

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is any disease involving the heart or blood vessels. CVDs constitute a class of diseases that includes: coronary artery diseases, heart failure, hypertensive heart disease, rheumatic heart disease, cardiomyopathy, arrhythmia, congenital heart disease, valvular heart disease, carditis, aortic aneurysms, peripheral artery disease, thromboembolic disease, and venous thrombosis.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Diseases of affluence</span> Health conditions thought to be a result of increasing wealth in society

Diseases of affluence, previously called diseases of rich people, is a term sometimes given to selected diseases and other health conditions which are commonly thought to be a result of increasing wealth in a society. Also referred to as the "Western disease" paradigm, these diseases are in contrast to so-called "diseases of poverty", which largely result from and contribute to human impoverishment. These diseases of affluence have vastly increased in prevalence since the end of World War II.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Framingham Heart Study</span> Cardiovascular cohort study

The Framingham Heart Study is a long-term, ongoing cardiovascular cohort study of residents of the city of Framingham, Massachusetts. The study began in 1948 with 5,209 adult subjects from Framingham, and is now on its third generation of participants. Prior to the study almost nothing was known about the epidemiology of hypertensive or arteriosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Much of the now-common knowledge concerning heart disease, such as the effects of diet, exercise, and common medications such as aspirin, is based on this longitudinal study. It is a project of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, in collaboration with Boston University. Various health professionals from the hospitals and universities of Greater Boston staff the project.

Type A and Type B personality hypothesis describes two contrasting personality types. In this hypothesis, personalities that are more competitive, highly organized, ambitious, impatient, highly aware of time management, or aggressive are labeled Type A, while more relaxed, "receptive", less "neurotic" and "frantic" personalities are labeled Type B.

Distressed personality type, or "type D" individuals, tend to suppress powerful negative emotions as a means of coping with stressful events or situations. These individuals suppress feelings of anger or sorrow even when they are in an environment that is supportive of emotional expression, such as suppressing anger when clearly justified, or refusing to cry at a funeral. The type D individual tends to be anxious, irritable, insecure, and uncomfortable with strangers. These types of people are constantly experiencing and anticipating negative emotions, which results in their being more tense and inhibited around others.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Michael Marmot</span> British medicine and public health academic (born 1945)

Sir Michael Gideon Marmot is Professor of Epidemiology and Public Health at University College London. He is currently the Director of The UCL Institute of Health Equity. Marmot has led research groups on health inequalities for over thirty years, working for various international and governmental bodies. In 2023, he was elected to the American Philosophical Society.

The social determinants of health (SDOH) are the economic and social conditions that influence individual and group differences in health status. They are the health promoting factors found in one's living and working conditions, rather than individual risk factors that influence the risk or vulnerability for a disease or injury. The distribution of social determinants is often shaped by public policies that reflect prevailing political ideologies of the area.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Allostatic load</span> Wear and tear on the body due to stress

Allostatic load is "the wear and tear on the body" which accumulates as an individual is exposed to repeated or chronic stress. The term was coined by Bruce McEwen and Eliot Stellar in 1993. It represents the physiological consequences of chronic exposure to fluctuating or heightened neural or neuroendocrine response which results from repeated or prolonged chronic stress.

The impact of alcohol on aging is multifaceted. Evidence shows that alcoholism or chronic alcohol consumption can cause both accelerated (or premature) aging – in which symptoms of aging appear earlier than normal – and exaggerated aging, in which the symptoms appear at the appropriate time but in a more exaggerated form. The effects of alcohol use disorder on the aging process include hypertension, cardiac dysrhythmia, cancers, gastrointestinal disorders, neurocognitive deficits, bone loss, and emotional disturbances especially depression. On the other hand, research also shows that drinking moderate amounts of alcohol may protect healthy adults from developing coronary heart disease. The American Heart Association cautions people not to start drinking, if you are not already drinking.

Social epidemiology focuses on the patterns in morbidity and mortality rates that emerge as a result of social characteristics. While an individual's lifestyle choices or family history may place him or her at an increased risk for developing certain illnesses, there are social inequalities in health that cannot be explained by individual factors. Variations in health outcomes in the United States are attributed to several social characteristics, such as gender, race, socioeconomic status, the environment, and educational attainment. Inequalities in any or all of these social categories can contribute to health disparities, with some groups placed at an increased risk for acquiring chronic diseases than others.

The obesity paradox is the finding in some studies of a lower mortality rate for overweight or obese people within certain subpopulations. The paradox has been observed in people with cardiovascular disease and cancer. Explanations for the paradox range from excess weight being protective to the statistical association being caused by methodological flaws such as confounding, detection bias, reverse causality, or selection bias.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Myocardial infarction</span> Interruption of blood supply to a part of the heart

A myocardial infarction (MI), commonly known as a heart attack, occurs when blood flow decreases or stops in one of the coronary arteries of the heart, causing infarction to the heart muscle. The most common symptom is chest pain or discomfort which may travel into the shoulder, arm, back, neck or jaw. Often such pain occurs in the center or left side of the chest and lasts for more than a few minutes. The discomfort may occasionally feel like heartburn.

Cognitive epidemiology is a field of research that examines the associations between intelligence test scores and health, more specifically morbidity and mortality. Typically, test scores are obtained at an early age, and compared to later morbidity and mortality. In addition to exploring and establishing these associations, cognitive epidemiology seeks to understand causal relationships between intelligence and health outcomes. Researchers in the field argue that intelligence measured at an early age is an important predictor of later health and mortality differences.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Seven Countries Study</span>

The Seven Countries Study is an epidemiological longitudinal study directed by Ancel Keys at what is today the University of Minnesota Laboratory of Physiological Hygiene & Exercise Science (LPHES). Begun in 1956 with a yearly grant of US$200,000 from the U.S. Public Health Service, the study was first published in 1978 and then followed up on its subjects every five years thereafter.

Social stress is stress that stems from one's relationships with others and from the social environment in general. Based on the appraisal theory of emotion, stress arises when a person evaluates a situation as personally relevant and perceives that they do not have the resources to cope or handle the specific situation.

The social determinants of health in poverty describe the factors that affect impoverished populations' health and health inequality. Inequalities in health stem from the conditions of people's lives, including living conditions, work environment, age, and other social factors, and how these affect people's ability to respond to illness. These conditions are also shaped by political, social, and economic structures. The majority of people around the globe do not meet their potential best health because of a "toxic combination of bad policies, economics, and politics". Daily living conditions work together with these structural drivers to result in the social determinants of health.

Marriage and health are closely related. Married people experience lower morbidity and mortality across such diverse health threats as cancer, heart attacks, and surgery. There are gender differences in these effects which may be partially due to men's and women's relative status. Most research on marriage and health has focused on heterosexual couples, and more work is needed to clarify the health effects on same-sex marriage. Simply being married, as well as the quality of one's marriage, has been linked to diverse measures of health. Research has examined the social-cognitive, emotional, behavioral and biological processes involved in these links.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Effects of overtime</span> Effects caused by overtime

Employees who work overtime hours experience numerous mental, physical, and social effects. In a landmark study, the World Health Organization and the International Labour Organization estimated that over 745,000 people died from ischemic heart disease or stroke in 2016 as a result of having worked 55 hours or more per week. Significant effects include stress, lack of free time, poor work-life balance, and health risks. Employee performance levels could also be lowered. Long work hours could lead to tiredness, fatigue, and lack of attentiveness. As a result, suggestions have been proposed for risk mitigation.

Archana Singh-Manoux is a research professor and director at the French Institute of Health and Medical Research (INSERM), Université de Paris, Paris, France, and an honorary professor at the Institute of Epidemiology & Health, Faculty of Population Health Science at the University College London (UCL), London, UK.

The Strong Heart Study is an ongoing cohort study of cardiovascular disease (CVD) and its risk factors among American Indian men and women. The original cohort began in 1984 with 4,549 participants ages 35–74 from 13 tribal nations and communities in Arizona, Oklahoma, North Dakota, and South Dakota. The need for specific ethnic and cultural understanding and sensitivities was recognized from the onset, so the study has a community-based participatory research (CBPR) model. Community members were involved in all stages of conception, design, and implementation of the research. Now in its seventh phase, the extensive research has led to many important findings about heart disease and unique risk factors in native populations. It is a project funded by the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI). The study maintains field centers in Oklahoma, North and South Dakota, and Arizona and a coordinating center at the University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center.

References

  1. 1 2 Marmot, M. G.; Rose, G.; Shipley, M.; Hamilton, P. J. (1978). "Employment grade and coronary heart disease in British civil servants". Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health. 32 (4): 244–249. doi:10.1136/jech.32.4.244. PMC   1060958 . PMID   744814.
  2. 1 2 Marmot, M. G.; Davey Smith, G.; Stansfield, S.; et al. (1991). "Health Inequalities among British civil servants: the Whitehall II study". Lancet. 337 (8754): 1387–1393. doi:10.1016/0140-6736(91)93068-K. PMID   1674771. S2CID   2791924.
  3. ↑ Marmot, MG (15 March 2006). "Status syndrome, a challenge to medicine". JAMA. 295 (11): 1304–7. doi:10.1001/jama.295.11.1304. PMID   16537740.
  4. ↑ Marmot, Michael; Kogevinas, M; Elston, M.A. (May 1987). "Social/Economic Status and Disease". Annual Review of Public Health. 8: 111–135. doi: 10.1146/annurev.pu.08.050187.000551 . PMID   3555518.
  5. ↑ "The Whitehall Study archive collection". London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine Archives. August 2017. Retrieved 27 September 2017.
  6. ↑ "Data sharing policy" (PDF). University College London. Retrieved 15 October 2019.
  7. 1 2 "Social determinants of health". World Health Organization. Retrieved 21 Aug 2010.
  8. ↑ Chandola, T.; Britton, A.; Brunner, E.; Hemingway, H; Malik, M; Kumari, M; Badrick, E; Kivimaki, M; Marmot, M (2008). "Work stress and coronary heart disease: what are the mechanisms?" (PDF). European Heart Journal. 29 (5): 640–648. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehm584 . PMID   18216031.
  9. ↑ Kunz-Ebrect, S. R.; Kirschbaum, C.; Marmot, M; Steptoe, A (2004). "Differences in cortisol awakening response on work days and weekends in woman and men from the Whitehall II cohort". Psychoneuroendocrinology. 29 (4): 516–528. doi:10.1016/S0306-4530(03)00072-6. PMID   14749096. S2CID   13738709.
  10. ↑ Kuper, H.; Marmot, M. (2003). "Job strain, job demands, decision latitude, and risk of coronary heart disease within the Whitehall II study". Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health. 57 (2): 147–153. doi:10.1136/jech.57.2.147. PMC   1732387 . PMID   12540692.
  11. ↑ Vaananen, A.; Koskinen, A.; Joensuu, M.; et al. (2008). "Lack of Predictability at Work and Risk of Acute Myocardial Infarction: An 18-Year Prospective Study of Industrial Employees". American Journal of Public Health. 98 (12): 2264–2271. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2007.122382. PMC   2636525 . PMID   18923130.
  12. ↑ Yarnell, J. (2008). "Stress at work—an independent risk factor for coronary heart disease?". European Heart Journal. 29 (5): 579–580. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehm641 . PMID   18263872.
  13. ↑ Steptoe, A.; Shameal-Tonsi, A.; Gylge, A.; Henderson, B; Bergström, S; Marmot, M (2007). "Socioeconomic status, pathogen burden and cardiovascular disease risk". Heart. 93 (12): 1567–1570. doi:10.1136/hrt.2006.113993. PMC   2095775 . PMID   17488763.
  14. ↑ Carratelli, C. R.; Nuzzo, I.; Cozzolino, D.; et al. (2006). "Relationship between Chlamydia pneumoniae infection, inflammatory markers, and coronary heart disease". International Immunopharmacology. 6 (5): 848–853. doi:10.1016/j.intimp.2005.10.012. PMID   16546716.
  15. ↑ O'Donnell, K.; Brydon, L.; Wright, C.; Steptoe, A. (2008). "Self-esteem levels and cardiovascular and inflammatory responses to acute stress". Brain, Behavior, and Immunity. 22 (8): 1241–1247. doi:10.1016/j.bbi.2008.06.012. PMID   18644432. S2CID   22559784.
  16. ↑ Figueredo, V. (2009). "The time has come for physicians to take notice: the impact of psychosocial stressors on the heart". The American Journal of Medicine. 122 (8): 704–712. doi:10.1016/j.amjmed.2009.05.001. PMID   19635269.

Further reading

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.