PURPOSE: There is a growing body of evidence that the built environment influences diet and exercise and, as a consequence, community health status. Since long-haul truck drivers spend long periods of time at truck stops, it is important to know if this built environment includes resources that contribute to the emotional and physical well-being of drivers. SETTING: The truck stop environment was defined as the truck stop itself, grocery stores, and medical clinics near the truck stop that could be accessed by a large truck or safely on foot. DESIGN: Researchers at the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) developed and utilized a checklist to record the availability of resources for personal hygiene and comfort, communication and mental stimulation, health care, safety, physical activity, and nutrition at truck stops. SUBJECTS: The NIOSH checklist was used to collect data at a convenience sample of 16 truck stops throughout the United States along both high-flow and low-flow truck traffic routes. MEASURES: The checklist was completed by observation within and around the truck stops. RESULTS: No truck stops offered exercise facilities, 94% lacked access to health care, 81% lacked a walking path, 50% lacked fresh fruit, and 37% lacked fresh vegetables in their restaurant or convenience store. CONCLUSION: The NIOSH found that most truck stops did not provide an overall healthy living environment.

Approximately 1,701,500 people were employed as heavy and tractor-trailer truck drivers in the United States in 2012. The majority of them were long-haul truck drivers (LHTDs). There are limited data on occupational injury and safety in LHTDs, which prompted a targeted national survey. The National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health conducted a nationally representative survey of 1265 LHTDs at 32 truck stops across the contiguous United States in 2010. Data were collected on truck crashes, near misses, moving violations, work-related injuries, work environment, safety climate, driver training, job satisfaction, and driving behaviors. Results suggested that an estimated 2.6% of LHTDs reported a truck crash in 2010, 35% reported at least one crash while working as an LHTD, 24% reported at least one near miss in the previous 7 days, 17% reported at least one moving violation ticket and 4.7% reported a non-crash injury involving days away from work in the previous 12 months. The majority (68%) of non-crash injuries among company drivers were not reported to employers. An estimate of 73% of LHTDs (16% often and 58% sometimes) perceived their delivery schedules unrealistically tight; 24% often continued driving despite fatigue, bad weather, or heavy traffic because they needed to deliver or pick up a load at a given time; 4.5% often drove 10miles per hours or more over the speed limit; 6.0% never wore a seatbelt; 36% were often frustrated by other drivers on the road; 35% often had to wait for access to a loading dock; 37% reported being noncompliant with hours-of-service rules (10% often and 27% sometimes); 38% of LHTDs perceived their entry-level training inadequate; and 15% did not feel that safety of workers was a high priority with their management. This survey brings to light a number of important safety issues for further research and interventions, e.g., high prevalence of truck crashes, injury underreporting, unrealistically tight delivery schedules, noncompliance with hours-of-service rules, and inadequate entry-level training.

BACKGROUND: Motor vehicle crashes were the leading cause of occupational fatalities in the United States in 2012, accounting for 25% of deaths. Truck drivers accounted for 46% of these deaths. This study estimates the prevalence of seat belt use and identifies factors associated with nonuse of seat belts among long-haul truck drivers (LHTDs), a group of workers at high risk for fatalities resulting from truck crashes. METHODS: CDC analyzed data from its 2010 national survey of LHTD health and injury. A total of 1,265 drivers completed the survey interview. Logistic regression was used to examine the association between seat belt nonuse and risk factors. RESULTS: An estimated 86.1% of LHTDs reported often using a seat belt, 7.8% used it sometimes, and 6.0% never. Reporting never using a belt was associated with often driving ≥10 mph (16 kph) over the speed limit (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 2.9), working for a company with no written safety program (AOR = 2.8), receiving two or more tickets for moving violations in the preceding 12 months (AOR = 2.2), living in a state without a primary belt law (AOR = 2.1); and being female (AOR = 2.3). CONCLUSIONS: Approximately 14% of LHTDs are at increased risk for injury and death because they do not use a seat belt on every trip. Safety programs and other management interventions, engineering changes, and design changes might increase seat belt use among LHTDs. IMPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH: Primary state belt laws can help increase belt use among LHTDs. Manufacturers can use recently collected anthropometric data to design better-fitting and more comfortable seat belt systems.

OBJECTIVE: To compare selected health behaviors and body mass index (modifiable risk factors) of US long-haul truck drivers to the US working population by sex. METHODS: The National Survey of US Long-Haul Truck Driver Health and Injury interviewed a nationally representative sample of long-haul truck drivers (n = 1265) at truck stops. Age-adjusted results were compared with national health surveys. RESULTS: Compared with US workers, drivers had significantly higher body mass index, current cigarette use, and pack-years of smoking; lower prevalence of annual influenza vaccination; and generally lower alcohol consumption. Physical activity level was low for most drivers, and 25% had never had their cholesterol levels tested. CONCLUSIONS: Working conditions common to long-haul trucking may create significant barriers to certain healthy behaviors; thus, transportation and health professionals should address the unique work environment when developing interventions for long-haul drivers.

BACKGROUND: Cancer and chronic disease are leading causes of death in the US with an estimated cost of $46 billion. METHODS: We analyzed 11 million cause-specific deaths of US workers age 18-64 years in 30 states during 1985-1999, 2003-2004, and 2007 by occupation, industry, race, gender, and Hispanic origin. RESULTS: The highest significantly elevated proportionate leukemia mortality was observed in engineers, protective service, and advertising sales manager occupations and in banks/savings & loans/credit agencies, public safety, and public administration industries. The highest significantly elevated smoking-adjusted acute myocardial infarction mortality was noted in industrial and refractory machinery mechanics, farmers, mining machine operators, and agricultural worker occupations; and wholesale farm supplies, agricultural chemical, synthetic rubber, and agricultural crop industries. CONCLUSIONS: Significantly elevated risks for acute myocardial infarction and leukemia were observed across several occupations and industries that confirm existing reports and add new information. Interested investigators can access the NOMS website at http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/NOMS/.

BACKGROUND: Drivers of heavy and tractor-trailer trucks accounted for 56% of all production and nonsupervisory employees in the truck transportation industry in 2011. There are limited data for illness and injury in long-haul truck drivers, which prompted a targeted national survey. METHODS: Interviewers collected data during 2010 from 1,670 long-haul truck drivers at 32 truck stops across the 48 contiguous United States that were used to compute prevalence estimates for self-reported health conditions and risk factors. RESULTS: Obesity (69% vs. 31%, P < 0.01) and current smoking (51% vs. 19%, P < 0.01) were twice as prevalent in long-haul truck drivers as in the 2010 U.S. adult working population. Sixty-one percent reported having two or more of the risk factors: hypertension, obesity, smoking, high cholesterol, no physical activity, 6 or fewer hours of sleep per 24-hr period. CONCLUSION: Survey findings suggest a need for targeted interventions and continued surveillance for long-haul truck drivers.

BACKGROUND: Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in US women, accounting for 72,130 deaths in 2006. In addition to smoking cessation, further reduction of the burden of lung cancer mortality can be made by preventing exposure to occupational lung carcinogens. Data for occupational exposures and health outcomes of US working women are limited. METHODS: Population-based mortality data for 4,570,711 women who died between 1984 and 1998 in 27 US States were used to evaluate lung cancer proportionate mortality over time by the usual occupation and industry reported on death certificates. Lung cancer proportionate mortality ratios were adjusted for smoking, using data from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) and the American Cancer Society's Cancer Prevention Study II. RESULTS: Analyses revealed that 194,382 white, 18,225 Black and 1,515 Hispanic women died 1984-1998 with lung cancer reported as the underlying cause of death. Following adjustment for smoking, significant excess proportionate lung cancer mortality was observed among US women working in the US manufacturing; transportation; retail trade; agriculture, forestry, and fishing; and nursing/personal care industries. Women employed in precision production, technical, managerial, professional specialty, and administrative occupations experienced some of the highest significantly excess proportionate lung cancer mortality during 1984-1998. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our study point to significantly elevated risks for lung cancer after adjustment for smoking among women in several occupations and industries. Because 6-17% of lung cancer in US males is attributable to known exposures to occupational carcinogens, and since synergistic interactions between cigarette smoke and other occupational lung carcinogens have been noted, it is important to continue research into the effects of occupational exposures on working men and women. Am. J. Ind. Med. (c) 2010 Wiley-Liss, Inc.