Skip to main content
. 2021 Sep 23;18(19):10014. doi: 10.3390/ijerph181910014

Table 3.

Multiple logistic regression analysis of the potential risk factors of moderate and high levels of adverse health effects among gasoline station workers (n = 151).

Characteristic Adverse Effect
n (%)
OR ORadj 95%CI p-Value
Gender
Male 13 (23.21) 0.95 1.33 0.56–3.19 0.517
Female 23 (24.21) 1.00 1.00
Age (year)
≤30 21 (34.43) 2.63 1.96 0.84–4.55 0.119
>30 15 (16.67) 1.00 1.00
Education level
Primary school or lower 24 (26.97) 1.54 1.76 0.73–4.25 0.209
high school or higher 12 (19.35) 1.00 1.00
Zone
Urban area 10 (35.71) 1.00 1.93 0.57–6.51 0.479
Suburban area 11 (13.58) 0.28 0.671 0.22–2.02 0.287
Rural area 15 (35.71) 1.00 1.00
Shift work
Day 16 (30.19) 0.59 0.56 0.22–1.39 0.214
Night 20 (20.41) 1.00 1.00
Training
No 19 (46.34) 4.72 5.22 2.16–12.58 <0.001 *
Yes 17 (15.45) 1.00 1.00
PPE use
Yes 23 (31.94) 2.38 2.11 0.86–5.16 0.101
No 13 (16.46) 1.00 1.00
Hand washing
No 8 (38.10) 2.24 1.84 0.57–5.98 0.312
Yes 28 (21.54) 1.00 1.00
Eat food in the working area
Yes 33 (27.73) 3.71 0.64 0.009–4.28 0.648
No 3 (9.38) 1.00 1.00
Eat food during work
Yes 35 (29.17) 12.35 16.08 1.96–131.74 0.010 *
No 1 (3.23) 1.00 1.00

Remark: Gender, age, education level was always included as the confounders. * Significant factors effecting with health adverse effect of benzene exposure p-value < 0.05.