Risk of developing hypertension in underground workers when psycho-vegetative status is transforming

View or download the full article: 
613.6.02: 613.65

N.N. Malyutina1, S.V. Paramonova1, N.S. Sedinina1, O.Yu. Ustinova2,3


1Perm State Medical University named after Academician E.A. Wagner, 26 Petropavlovskaya Str., Perm, 614990, Russian Federation
2Federal Scientific Center for Medical and Preventive Health Risk Management Technologies, 82 Monastyrskaya Str., Perm, 614045, Russian Federation
3Perm State National Research University, 15 Bukireva Str., Perm, 614990, Russian Federation


The present research work is vital given the importance of studying risk factors that can cause mortality due to diseases of the circulatory system, especially among population of employable age. Our research aim was to establish what factors might induce developing hypertension based on examining psycho-vegetative status, biochemical and functional parameters of the cardiovascular system in underground workers depending on their age.

We examined 109 men who were employed at a chromium mining enterprise and were exposed to occupational and psy-chosocial factors. The patients were divided into two groups; the test group was made up of 60 men who worked under ground under working conditions ranked as “hazardous” and belonging to hazard category 3.3–3.4; the reference group consisted of 49 men who dealt with surface works under working conditions belonging to hazard category 3.2. The test group was further divided into two sub-groups depending on workers’ age: people younger than 45 (n = 20, average age was 38.45 ± 2.95) and people older than (n = 40, average age was 50.90 ± 1.46). The reference group was also divided accordingly. The patients had their psycho-vegetative status examined profoundly with assessing neuropsychic stress, personal and situational anxiety, attention function, and subjective reflection of psycho-vegetative distress. The state of the cardiovascular system (CVS) was examined using results of functional and clinical-laboratory diagnostics.

Decreased attention, greater personal anxiety and a greater number of psycho-vegetative complaints were detected authenti-cally more frequently among patients with hypertension (OR 7.50, 95 % CI 2.39–23.58; OR 11.06, 95 % CI 4.35–28.10; OR 22.50; 95 % CI 7.09–71.41). We detected differences in adaptation psycho-vegetative phenotypes between two sub-groups. A correlation between age and working experience and indicators of psycho-vegetative status was established for patients younger than 45 but there was no correlation with homeostasis indicators. There was a negative correlation between age and working experience and some indicators of psycho-vegetative status revealed for patients older than 45; there was a direct correlation between these parameters and certain homeostasis indicators given hypertension diagnosed in 95 % patients in this sub-group.

As age and working experience grew, adaptation psycho-vegetative phenotype transformed and the process involved inversion of correlations with psycho-vegetative indicators together with aggravating functional disorders of the CVS. When transformation of this phenotype is diagnosed, it allows assessing risks of developing hypertension and makes for primary hypertension prevention through determining risk groups among workers.

psycho-vegetative status, hazardous underground work, functional changes, psycho-vegetative phenotype, hypertension, psychosocial factors
Malyutina N.N., Paramonova S.V., Sedinina N.S., Ustinova O.Yu. Risk of developing hypertension in underground workers when psycho-vegetative status is transforming. Health Risk Analysis, 2021, no. 4, pp. 100–109. DOI: 10.21668/health.risk/2021.4.11.eng
  1. Malyutina N.N., Sedinin A.L., Luzina S.V., Sedinina N.S. The features of emotional state of the workers of railway transport. Elektronnyi nauchno-obrazovatel'nyi vestnik: Zdorov'e i obrazovanie v XXI veke, 2017, vol. 19, no. 7, pp. 97–98 (in Russian).
  2. Workplace stress: A collective challenge. Geneva, International Labor Organization Publ., 2016. Available at: https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/---ed_protect/---protrav/---saf... (17.07.2021).
  3. Romasenko L.V., Makhov V.M., Chichkova N.V. Functional (psychosomatic) disorders in general medical practice. Nevrologiya, neiropsikhiatriya, psikhosomatika, 2019, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 69–73. DOI: 10.14412/2074-2711-2019-3-69-73 (in Russian).
  4. Samorodskaya I.V., Starinskaya M.A., Semyonov V.Yu., Kakorina E.P. Nosologically and age-stratified mortality structure from cardiovascular diseases in the years 2006 and 2014. Rossiiskii kardiologicheskii zhurnal, 2016, vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 7–14. DOI: 10.15829/1560-4071-2016-6-7-14 (in Russian).
  5. Fatkhutdinova L.M., Leontyeva E.A. Monitoring work stress as a part of occupational hygiene management system. Meditsina truda i promyshlennaya ekologiya, 2018, no. 1, pp. 28–32. DOI: 10.31089/1026-9428-2018-1-28-32 (in Russian).
  6. Gromova E.A. Psychosocial factors risk of cardiovascular diseases (review of the literature). Sibirskii meditsinskii zhurnal (g. Tomsk), 2012, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 22–29 (in Russian).
  7. Aronsson G., Theorell T., Grape T., Hammarström A., Hogstedt C., Marteinsdottir I., Skoog I., Träskman-Bendz L., Hall C. A systematic review including meta-analysis of work environment and burnout symptoms. BMC Public Health, 2017, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 264. DOI: 10.1186/s12889-017-4153-7
  8. Jood K., Karlsson N., Medin J., Pessah-Rasmussen H., Wester P., Ekberg K. The psychosocial work environment is associated with risk of stroke at working age. Scand. J. Work Environ. Health, 2017, vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 367–374. DOI: 10.5271/sjweh.3636
  9. Weinberg A., Hudson J.H., Pearson A., Chowdhury S.B. Organizational uptake of NICE guidance in promoting employees' psychological health. Occupational Medicine, 2019, vol. 69, no. 1, pp. 47–53. DOI: 10.1093/occmed/kqy148
  10. Gafarov V.V., Gagulin I.V., Gromova E.A., Panov D.O., Gafarova A.V. Depression, anxiety and sleep disorders in 45–69-year-old population in Russia (Siberia): epidemiological survey. Nevrologiya, neiropsikhiatriya, psikhosomatika, 2017, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 31–37. DOI: 10.14412/2074-2711-2017-4-31-37 (in Russian).
  11. Mesa-Vieira C., Grolimund J., von Känel R., Franco O.H., Saner H. Psychosocial Risk Factors in Cardiac Rehabilitation: Time to Screen Beyond Anxiety and Depression. Global Heart, 2021, vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 16. DOI: 10.5334/gh.896
  12. Lichtman J.H., Froelicher E.S., Blumenthal J.A., Carney R.M., Doering L.V., Frasure-Smith N., Freedland K.E., Jaffe A.S. [et al.]. Depression as a risk factor for poor prognosis among patients with acute coronary syndrome: systematic review and recommendations: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Circulation, 2014, vol. 129, no. 12, pp. 1350–1369. DOI: 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000019
  13. Gan Y., Gong Y., Tong X., Sun H., Cong Y., Dong X., Wang Y., Xu X. [et al.]. Depression and the risk of coronary heart disease: a meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies. BMC Psychiatry, 2014, vol. 14, pp. 371. DOI: 10.1186/s12888-014-0371-z
  14. Van Dijk M.R., Utens E.M., Dulfer K., Al-Qezweny M.N., van Geuns R.J., Daemen J., van Domburg R.T. Depression and anxiety symptoms as predictors of mortality in PCI patients at 10 years of follow-up. Eur. J. Prev. Cardiol., 2016, vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 552–558. DOI: 10.1177/2047487315571889
  15. Sin N.L., Kumar A.D., Gehi A.K., Whooley M.A. Direction of Association Between Depressive Symptoms and Lifestyle Behaviors in Patients with Coronary Heart Disease: the Heart and Soul Study. Ann. Behav. Med., 2016, vol. 50, no. 4, pp. 523–532. DOI: 10.1007/s12160-016-9777-9
  16. Velikanov А.А., Stolyarova A.A., Kruglova N.E., Demchenko E.A. Psychoemotional features in patients with coronary heart disease: literature review. Psikhologiya. Psikhofiziologiya, 2020, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 23–33. DOI: 10.14529/jpps200103
  17. Long V., Brown V. Conceptualizing work-related mental distress in the British coalfields (c. 1900–1950). Palgrave Commun., 2018, vol. 4, pp. 133. DOI: 10.1057/s41599-018-0187-4
  18. Rugulies R. What is a psychosocial work environment? Scand. J. Work Environ. Health, 2019, vol. 45, no. 1, pp. 1–6. DOI: 10.5271/sjweh.3792
  19. Bukhtiyarov I.V., Matiukhin V.V., Rubtsov M.Yu. Occupational stress in light of WHO Global Plan of action on workers’ health. Mezhdunarodnyi nauchno-issledovatel'skii zhurnal, 2016, no. 3 (45), Part 3, pp. 53–55. DOI: 10.18454/IRJ.2016.45.014 (in Russian).
  20. Malyutina N.N., Paramonova S.V., Sedinina N.S. The formation of the psycho-vegetative phenotype of intensive workers. Vestnik «Biomeditsina i sotsiologiya», 2020, vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 5–10. DOI: 10.26787/nydha-2618-8783-2020-5-2-5-10 (in Russian).

You are here