An association between smoking habits and blood pressure in normotensive Japanese men

We conducted a cross-sectional study to clarify the dose-effect relationship of smoking habits with blood pressure in Japanese men. The subjects were 2781 normotensive male steelworkers ranging in age from 40 to 54 years. They were classified into five categories according to their smoking habits: n...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inJournal of human hypertension Vol. 16; no. 2; pp. 91 - 96
Main Authors Okubo, Y, Miyamoto, T, Suwazono, Y, Kobayashi, E, Nogawa, K
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published England Nature Publishing Group 01.02.2002
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:We conducted a cross-sectional study to clarify the dose-effect relationship of smoking habits with blood pressure in Japanese men. The subjects were 2781 normotensive male steelworkers ranging in age from 40 to 54 years. They were classified into five categories according to their smoking habits: non-smokers, ex-smokers, light smokers, moderate smokers and heavy smokers. Age, body mass index, salt intake, physical activity, drinking habits, and levels of gamma-glutamyl transpeptidase, total serum cholesterol, uric acid, creatinine and plasma glucose were analysed as covariates. The association between smoking habits and blood pressure was evaluated using analysis of covariance. Our results showed that there was no significant difference in the adjusted systolic and diastolic blood pressure between non-smokers and ex-smokers. The adjusted systolic and diastolic blood pressures in light, moderate and heavy smokers were significantly lower than in non- and ex-smokers. However, among smokers, no significant difference was observed in correlation with smoking amount. In conclusion, blood pressure of smokers was lower than that of non- and ex-smokers. However, there were no significant dose-effect relationships between smoking amount and blood pressure when lifestyle and other confounding factors were considered.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-1
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-2
content type line 23
ISSN:0950-9240
1476-5527
DOI:10.1038/sj.jhh.1001303