Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society (한국산학기술학회논문지)

The Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society (한국산학기술학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Difference in the Quality of Life and Related Factors according to the Employment Status

경제활동 상태에 따른 삶의 질 차이와 관련요인

  • Gim, Mi-Seon (Department of Physiology laboratory, St. Vincent’s Hospital, The Catholic University) ;
  • Han, Ji-Yeon (Division of HIV/AIDS and TB Control, Korea Center for Disease & Prevention) ;
  • Kim, Chul-Woung (Department of Preventive Medicine, Chungnam National University, School of Medicine and Research Institute for Medical Sciences)
  • 김미선 (가톨릭대학교 성빈센트병원 기능검사실) ;
  • 한지연 (질병관리본부 질병예방센터 에이즈결핵관리과) ;
  • 김철웅 (충남대학교 의학전문대학원 예방의학교실)
  • Received : 2015.07.03
  • Accepted : 2015.09.11
  • Published : 2015.09.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The purpose of study is to find difference in the quality of life and related factors according to the employment status. Using data from the fifth National Health and Nutrition Survey, economically active population of 20-69 years old 3,429 participants who said to questions of 'economic activity status' were finally used as analysis subjects in Korea. According to economic activity status, individuals were divided by the six different employment status and their quality of life was inspected using the EQ-5D dimensions and index score as well as analyzing the factors affecting the quality of life. As a result, unemployed compared to full-time workers, had significantly higher needs of four dimensions and Unpaid family workers had in the dimensions of Mobility, Self-care and Usual activities and temporary job had in the dimensions of Self-care and Usual activities. After figuring out life quality factors according to employment status, it was found that compared to full-time workers greater age(${\beta}=-0.089$, p<0.001), more stress(${\beta}=-0.143$, p<0.0001), hyperlipidemia(${\beta}=-0.064$, p<0.0001), stroke, arthritis(${\beta}=-0.160$, p<0.0001), respiratory diseases(${\beta}=-0.055$, p<0.001) and chronic health conditions were more influential to low quality of life for temporary job(${\beta}=-0.034$, p<0.05), day workers(${\beta}=-0.078$, p<0.0001) and unemplyed(${\beta}=-0.052$, p<0.01). The study is reported that it is to find difference in the quality of life and related factors according to the employment status and it is considered to provide basis for health evaluation of utilization in the same field of study.

본 논문은 조사대상자의 경제활동 여부와 종사상지위에 따른 삶의 질 차이와 이에 영향을 미치는 요인을 파악하고자 하였다. 이를 위해 '경제활동 상태' 설문에 응답한 한국의 20-69세 경제활동인구 3,429명의 제5기 국민건강영양조사 대상자 자료를 분석하였다. 조사대상자들을 경제활동 여부에 따라 6개의 종사상지위별로 나누고 EQ-5D 5개 영역에서의 문제호소비율을 파악하기 위해 교차분석을 하였고, 삶의 질에 영향을 미치는 요인을 파악하기 위해 로지스틱 회귀분석과 다중회귀분석을 실시하였다. 분석 결과, 무직은 상용직에 비해 운동능력 영역을 제외한 4개 영역에서 EQ-5D 5개 영역에서의 문제호소비율이 높았다. 그리고, 무급가족종사자의 경우, 운동능력, 자기관리 및 일상활동 영역에서, 임시직의 경우, 자기관리 및 일상활동 영역에서 상용직에 비해 문제호소비율이 높았다. 삶의 질 지수(EQ-5D index score)의 경우, 상용직에 비해 임시직(${\beta}=-0.034$, p<0.05), 일용직(${\beta}=-0.078$, p<0.0001) 및 무직(${\beta}=-0.052$, p<0.01)에서 연령이 높을수록(${\beta}=-0.089$, p<0.001), 스트레스를 많이 받을수록(${\beta}=-0.143$, p<0.0001), 고지혈증(${\beta}=-0.064$, p<0.0001), 뇌졸중(${\beta}=-0.086$, p<0.0001), 관절염(${\beta}=-0.160$, p<0.0001), 호흡기 질환(${\beta}=-0.055$, p<0.001)의 만성질환이 있을 경우 삶의 질이 낮았다. 본 연구는 경제활동 여부와 종사상지위에 따라 삶의 질에 차이가 있으며 이들 요인은 삶의 질에 영향을 미치는 것으로 파악되었다. 이는 건강수준을 평가하는 기초자료로 동일 분야 연구에 활용이 있을 것으로 사료된다.

Keywords

References

  1. Abdin E, Subramaniam M, Vaingankar JA, Luo N, Chong SA. Measuring health-related quality of the among adults in Singapore: population norms for the EQ-5D. Qual Life Res, Vol. 22, No. 10, 2983-2991, 2013. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-013-0405-x
  2. Kimman M, Vathesatogkit P, Woodward M. Validity of the Thai EQ-5D in an occupational population in Thailand. Qual Life Res, Vol. 22, No. 6, 1499-1506, 2012. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-012-0251-2
  3. S.Y. Sohn. The Effect of Regular Workers and Non-regular Workers on the Subjective Health Status. Korean Journal of Occupational Health Nursing, Vol. 20, No. 3, 346-355, November 2012. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5807/kjohn.2011.20.3.346
  4. H.R. Kim. The Relationship of Socioeconomic Position and Health Behaviors with Morbidity in Seoul, Korea. Korea Institute for Health and Social Affairs, Vol. 25, No. 2, 3-35, 2005.
  5. G.T. Lim. Difference in Health-related Quality of Life among Social Classes and Related Factors in korea. Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society, Vol. 13, No. 5, 2189-2198, May 2012. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5762/KAIS.2012.13.5.2189
  6. Barger SD, Donoho CJ, Wayment HA. The relative contributions of race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, health, and socail relationships to life satisfaction in the United States. Qual Life Res, 18, 179-189, 2009. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-008-9426-2
  7. Lubetkin EI, Jia H, Franks P, Gold MR. Relationship among sociodemographic factors, clinical conditions, and health-related quality of life: Examining the EQ-5D in the U.S. general population. Qual Life Res, 14, 2187-2196, 2005. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-005-8028-5
  8. Sun S, Chen J, Johannesson M. Population health status in China: EQ-5D results, by age, sex and socio-economic status, from the National Health Services Survey 2008. Qual Life Res, 20, 309-320, 2011. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11136-010-9762-x
  9. S.C. Shin, M.C. Kim. The Effect of Occupation and Employment Status upon Perceived Health in South Korea. Health and Social Science, 2007-7, 205-224, 2007.
  10. E.S. Jeon, K.S. Lee, S.Y. Lee, J.H. Yu, A.R. Hong. The Relationship between Job stress and Quality of Life for Hospital Workers by Type of Employment. Korean J Occup Environ Med,Vol. 21, No. 1, 28-37, 2009.
  11. S.J. Coons, S Rao, D.L. Keininger, R.D. Hays. A comparative Review of Generic Quality-of-life Instruments. Pharmacoeconomics, Vol. 17, No. 1, 13-35, January 2000. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200017010-00002
  12. H.S. Nam. South Korean time trade-off values for EQ-5D health states. Public Health Weekly Report, Vol. 3, No. 16, 261-264, 2010.
  13. Burstrom K, Johannesson M, Diderichsen F. Increasing socio-economic inequalities in life expectancy and QALYs in Sweden 1980-1997. Health Econ, Vol. 14, No. 8, 831-850, 2005. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/hec.977
  14. Sergio Rueda, Janet Raboud, Cameron Mustard, Ahmed Bayoumi, John N. Lavis. AIDS Care, Vol. 23, No. 4, 435-443, 2011. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09540121.2010.507952
  15. S.Y. Lee, S.J. Kim, J.Y. Shin, K.T. Han, E.C. Park. The impact of job status on quality of life: general population versus long-term cancer survivors. Psycho-Oncology, wileyonlinelibrary.com, 2015.
  16. Bouwin E Carlier, Merel Schuring, Freek JB Lotters, Bernhard Bakker, Natacha Borgers, Alex Burdorf. The influence of re-employment on quality of life and self-rated health, a longditudinal study among unemployed persons in the Netherlands. BMC Public Health, 2013, 13:503 DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-13-503
  17. S.S. Sung, C.B. Choi, Y.K. Sung, Y.W. Bak, H.S. Lee, W.S. Um, T.H. Kim, J.B. Jeon, D.H. Jeon, O.Y. Lee, S.C. Bae. Health-Related Quality of Life using EQ-5D in Koreans. The Journal of the Korean Rheumatism Association, Vol. 11, No. 3, 254-262, 2004.
  18. M.W. Jo, S.I. Lee, S.R. Kil. J.H. Lee, W.C. Kang, H.S. Sohn, C.I. Yoo. Measuring Health Related Quality of Life of General Adult Population in One Metropolitan City using EQ-5D. Korean Journal of Health Policy & Administration, Vol.18. No. 3, 40-23, 2008.