XXXX at sea: a case-control study among male Finnish seafarers.

@entity706 @entity5 @entity2 @entity2615 @entity1778 @entity2708 @entity703
AIMS: To study the possible work related reasons for the increased incidence of many @entity5 among seafarers. METHODS: A case-control study, nested in a cohort of all male seafarers (n = 30 940) who, according to the files of the Seamen's Pension Fund, had worked on board Finnish ships for any time during the period 1960-80. Cases of @entity703 , @entity1778 , @entity706 , and all cases histologically defined as @entity2615 were identified from the Finnish @entity5 Registry in 1967-92. The preceding numbers of years at sea in various occupational categories were collected according to the type of @entity2708 (dry cargo @entity2708 , tanker, passenger vessel, icebreaker, other vessel). RESULTS: The incidence for @entity2 among engine crew increased with the increase in employment time, the odds ratio (OR) after three years being 1.68 (95% CI 1.17 to 2.41). The OR of @entity2 for deck officers was 0.42 (95% CI 0.29 to 0.61). Deck personnel on icebreakers had a significantly increased risk of @entity2 > or =20 years after first employment (OR 3.41, 95% CI 1.23 to 9.49). The OR for @entity2615 among engine crew with a latency of 20 years was 9.75 (95% CI 1.88 to 50.6). The OR for @entity703 among deck officers after three years employment was 2.15 (95% CI 1.14 to 4.08), but there was no increase by employment time or by latency. A rise of OR for @entity706 was detected among deck personnel on tankers, if the employment had lasted over three years (OR 2.78, 95% CI 0.98 to 7.92). The risk pattern for @entity1778 was similar to that of @entity706 , the OR among deck personnel on tankers varying from 2.26 (95% CI 1.01 to 5.06) to 6.86 (95% CI 1.62 to 28.8) depending on the length of employment. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate that occupational exposures of deck crews on tankers add to their risk of @entity703 , @entity1778 , and possibly @entity706 . Engine crews have an asbestos related risk of @entity2615 , and the engine room conditions also seem to increase risk of @entity2 .
