Association between shift work or long working hours with metabolic syndrome: a systematic review and dose–response meta-analysis of observational studies

ABSTRACT

This meta-analysis investigates the relationship between both shift work and long working hours and risk of developing metabolic syndrome (MetS). PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science databases were searched from the outset to December 10, 2019. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. A total of 36 (30 cross-sectional, 5 cohort, and a nested case-control) studies, involving 274,263 participants, were included. The pooled odds ratio of shift work and development of MetS was 1.35 (95% confidence interval: 1.24–1.48), and the pooled odds ratio of long working hours and development of MetS was 1.19 (95% confidence interval: 0.97–1.46). In the subgroup analysis stratified by gender, the pooled odds ratios for male and female shift workers were 1.25 (95% confidence interval: 1.14–1.37) and 1.47 (95% confidence interval: 1.18–1.82), respectively. The dose–response (number of years of shift work and development of MetS) analysis showed the pooled odds ratio for 5 years of shift work was 1.07 (95% confidence interval: 1.05–1.09) and for 10 years of shift work 1.11 (95% confidence interval: 1.06–1.15). Our meta-analysis confirmed shift work is significantly associated with risk of metabolic syndrome, but the relationship between long working hours and MetS was not substantiated. Additionally, there was a nonlinear dose–response relationship between the number of years of shift work and risk of MetS, showing positive relationship to about 20 years of shift work but not for longer than 20 years. Prospective cohort studies regarding specific shift work schedules are needed to confirm these results.

KEYWORDS:

• Shift work
• long working hours
• metabolic syndrome
• meta-analysis
• dose–response relationship
• gender

Acknowledgements

Thanks to the database provided by Lanzhou University and the help provided by Shuaicheng Han and Shuaixiang Zhao.

Contributors

YHW conceived the study. YHW, LY, and YYG performed the searching, data extraction, and quality assessment. PJW and YWC helped develop search strategies. YHW analyzed data and wrote the first manuscript. YYG, LLJ, LY, XPS, LG, and GWD contributed to reviewing, or revising the paper. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Disclosure of interest

The authors report no conflict of interest.