Loudoun, R and Markwell, K (2017) Energy drink consumption in the Australian construction industry: A risky new trend? Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 143(8): 04017039, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
Construction workforces' health behaviors have received little attention compared with work injury risks and management. Formulated caffeinated beverage (FCB) (energy drink) consumption is relatively new to construction sites and excessive consumption may have effects on both health and safety owing to known short- and long-term physiological responses. This study contributes to understanding drivers and deterrents of caffeine and FCB consumption in construction. Data were collected from workers at six construction sites in Queensland, Australia, using mixed-method research design involving semistructured interviews (70) and quantitative surveys (n=250). Convergent interviewing underpinned by the theory of reasoned action was used to analyze qualitative interviews. Bivariate logistic regression analyses were conducted to examine determinants of caffeine and FCB consumption. Work hours were associated with caffeine consumption >210 mg/day (β=-0.046, p=0.037). Qualitative results indicate energy drinks are consumed widely and regularly on site, with stress and attempts to manage the pace, timing, and intensity seen as drivers for consumption. In combination, these findings suggest management of FCBs on construction sites requires more attention as a potential health hazard.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | caffeine; dietary habits; health; labor and personnel issues |
| Index terms: | health and safety, injury, interview, personnel, health hazard, survey, Queensland, construction site, habit, consumption, Australia, research design, theory of reasoned action, logistic regression analysis, health behaviour, determinant, construction industry |
| Subjects: | work location, research design and methodology, data collection methods, risk assessment, health behaviours and lifestyles, consumer economics, health conditions and diseases, behavioral psychology, environmental hazards, statistical analysis, industry analysis, management, health safety and environment, Geography |
| Topics: | Health and Safety, Geographical Context, Research Practice, Stakeholder Management, Risk Management, Sustainability, Human Resources, Site Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here