Multiple risk behaviors for non-communicable diseases and associated factors in adolescents

Abstract

Objective: To estimate the prevalence of risk behaviors for non-communicable diseases and analyze their associated factors in adolescents. Methods: A school-based cross-sectional study was conducted in 2008 with 1,139 adolescents aged 14 to 19 years attending public and private high schools in Cuiabá, Midwestern Brazil. Data were collected using a selfadministered questionnaire, including a semiquantitative Food Frequency Questionnaire. The prevalence of tobacco smoking, alcohol experimentation, physical inactivity, unsatisfactory meal pattern, and excessive intake of saturated fat and sodium were evaluated. The associations between risk behaviors and socioeconomic variables, weight status, and self-perceived health status were evaluated. Results: The most common risk behaviors were excessive sodium intake (88%), unsatisfactory meal pattern (72%), excessive intake of saturated fat (39%), and alcohol experimentation (39%). Four of 10 adolescents were exposed to two risk behaviors simultaneously. Among male adolescents, the main factors associated with risk behaviors were: type of school, class schedule, education level of the household head, weight status, and self-perceived health status. Among female adolescents, age, type of school, class schedule, and education level of the household head were the main factors associated with risk behaviors. Conclusion: The prevalence of exposure to risk behaviors for non-communicable diseases was high, highlighting the simultaneous presence of tobacco smoking and experimentation of alcoholic beverages. Special attention should be given to educational activities to minimize the effects of the simultaneous occurrence of multiple risk behaviors.

Co-occurrence of behavioral risk factors for chronic non-communicable diseases in adolescents: Prevalence and associated factors

“…The high frequency of the co-occurrence of risk factors for NTCDs (almost 70.0%), observed in this study, has also been described by other authors (ranging from 45.0% to 72.2%) [7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14]. However, comparison with the findings of those studies should be performed with caution due to the diversity in the risk behaviors assessed.…”

“…In this study, being a Caucasian adolescent and having private school education were considered markers of a better socioeconomic situation [31], and presented a higher chance of the co-occurrence of risk factors compared to the case of black/brown and public school students. Rodrigues et al [13], observed a similar relationship in adolescents from private schools of Cuiabá, Mato Grosso, while Tassitano et al [11] observed a higher chance of exposure to three or more risk behaviors, in adolescents with a higher family income. However, Silva et al [14], reported a lower chance of the clustering of risk factors among those whose mothers had a higher level of schooling.…”

“…Nunes et al [8], also studied five factors, but did not take into account overweight to compose the variable co-occurrence. Other authors studied four factors, without evaluating the consumption of alcohol [9] or overweight [10][11][12][13], or three factors, without evaluating tobacco consumption or excess weight [14].…”

Risk Behaviour Patterns for Chronic Diseases and Associated Factors Among Adolescents

“…an association between alcohol consumption and tobacco use in adolescents (10,23). The determinants of this relationship are not well understood, however, the etiology of multiple psychoactive substances comorbidity indicates that substances such as alcohol and tobacco share common genetic and environmental factors (24).…”

“…Moreover, it has been shown that certain risk behaviors increase the risk of involvement in others, forming clusters of behaviors (6)(7)(8), that is, the occurrence of concurrent risk behaviors in adolescents (9,10). Simultaneity of different risk behaviors may have a synergistic effect on the deterioration of individual health; in other words, it may result in a multiplicative deleterious effect, rather than an additive effect of each behavior (11).…”