Risk of Raynaud's Phenomenon Among Workers in the Occupational Disease Surveillance System

TL;DR

This study finds that certain jobs increase the risk of Raynaud's phenomenon, with different risks for men and women.

Contribution

The study provides new sex-specific insights into occupational risk factors for Raynaud's phenomenon using a large worker cohort.

Findings

Men in truck driving and mining jobs had higher Raynaud's risk.

Women in food service and electrical work had elevated Raynaud's risk.

Sex differences suggest varying exposure and susceptibility patterns.

Abstract

Raynaud's phenomenon (RP) is linked to occupational exposures such as vibration, cold temperature, and chemicals. However, large cohort studies examining RP by occupation and sex are scarce. To address this gap, this study aimed to assess risk of RP by both occupation and sex in a large cohort of workers in Ontario, Canada.

Workers with accepted lost‐time compensation claims were linked to physician billing records to identify diagnoses of RP between 2002 and 2020. A 3‐year washout (disease‐free) period was applied, and follow‐up was limited to 5 years. Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for diagnoses of RP, adjusted for age at start of follow‐up, birth year, and stratified by sex.

A total of 7,131 RP cases were identified among 810,739 workers. Among men, higher risks were observed for truck drivers (HR = 1.23, 95% CI = 1.08–1.41), driver‐salesmen (HR = 2.54, 95% CI = 1.21–5.34), those in mining and quarrying‐related cutting, handling, and loading (HR = 2.57, 95% CI = 1.29–5.15), and construction trades laboring and elemental work (HR = 1.70, 95% CI = 1.24–2.34). Among women, higher risks were observed for those working in waitressing and related (HR = 1.70, 95% CI = 1.22–2.38), food and beverage preparation (HR = 1.34, 95% CI = 1.02–1.76), and electrical equipment fabricating and assembling (HR 1.96, 95% CI = 1.08–3.55).

Study findings show elevated risks of RP among various occupations, with notable differences between men and women. These differences may be attributable to variations in potential exposures and susceptibility to RP. Findings underscore the need for large cohort studies to examine RP across various occupational groups and both sexes.