Gender differences in experience and reporting of acute symptoms among cleaning staff

Occupational exposure to chemical substances and health outcomes among hospital environmental services workers: A scoping review of international studies

Environmental services (EVS) workers are essential to preventing the spread of disease in hospitals. However, their exposure to hazardous chemicals and drugs is understudied. This scoping review will synthesize literature on hazardous chemical exposures and adverse health outcomes among EVS workers to identify research gaps and trends for further investigation. The scoping review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to ensure complete and accurate reporting. The scoping review included 25 studies on occupational exposure to chemicals among EVS workers in hospitals. Most studies focused on exposure to cleaning products, which led to dermal, respiratory, and ocular symptoms, oxidative stress, and inflammation. While personal protective equipment (PPE), training, education, and policies have the potential to enhance safety, further research is required to examine the long-term impacts of exposure and the cost-effectiveness of interventions. Future studies should utilize longitudinal approaches and self-reported data collection methods, such as diaries and interviews, to comprehensively assess exposure risks and develop effective interventions and policies. Future research is needed to understand the potential health risks faced by EVS workers from exposure to chemicals in hospitals. Longitudinal studies with objective exposure assessments and larger sample sizes should be conducted. Policies and interventions must be developed and implemented to improve safe work practices and reduce negative health outcomes.

Underreporting of work-related low back pain among registered nurses: A mixed method study

BACKGROUND

Identifying and addressing work-related health problems early is crucial, but workers often perceive barriers in reporting these to management. This study aimed to investigate the factors associated with nurses' reporting of work-related low back pain to their managers and explored the reasons why nurses with patient handling injuries did not report them.

METHODS

This study is a concurrent mixed-method analysis of data from two statewide cross-sectional surveys of California registered nurses conducted in 2013 and 2016. The reporting of work-related low back pain to management (n = 288) was examined for associations with individual, occupational, and organizational factors. For qualitative analysis, the reasons for not reporting patient handling injuries were explored using open-ended responses (n = 42).

RESULTS

Reporting was associated with BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and People of Color) men (adjusted odds ratio [AOR]: 1.31, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.07-1.59) compared to non-Hispanic White women; being a non-US educated nurse (AOR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.80-1.01); experiencing greater low back pain (AOR: 1.07, 95% CI: 1.02-1.12); missing work (AOR: 1.38, 95% CI: 1.21-2.62); perceiving high physical workload (AOR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.81-0.98); perceiving high people-oriented culture (AOR: 1.14, 95% CI: 1.04-1.25); and perceiving high ergonomic practices (AOR: 0.89, 95% CI: 0.81-0.98). Identified themes on the reasons for not reporting injuries included organizational-culture attitudes toward work-related injuries and injury characteristics of musculoskeletal disorders.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings indicate a need for management to remove structural barriers and improve organizational practices, and for a culture that promotes trust and open communication between workers and management.

Underreporting of workers' injuries or illnesses and contributing factors: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Accurate identification of work-related health problems is important to understand workplace safety issues and develop appropriate interventions. Although workers' reporting of work-related injuries or illnesses is the very first step of the reporting process, many workers may encounter challenges in reporting them to their management or workers' compensation (WC) programs. This systematic review aimed to identify the level of workers' underreporting of work-related injuries and illnesses and the contributing factors and reasons for underreporting among US workers.

METHODS

This study searched PubMed (Medline), PsycINFO (ProQuest), CINAHL (EBSCOhost), EMBASE (Embase.com), and Social Science Citation Index (Web of Science) using search terms related to underreporting of work-related injury or illness.

RESULTS

Twenty studies (17 quantitative and three mixed methods studies) were identified. The studies investigated reporting to management (n = 12), WC programs (n = 6), multiple organizations (n = 1), and not specified (n = 1). The timeframe used to measure reporting prevalence varied from three months to entire careers of workers, with the most common timeframe of 12 months. This review indicated that 20-91% of workers did not report their injuries or illnesses to management or WC programs. From quantitative studies, contributing factors for injury or illness underreporting were categorized as follows: injury type and severity, sociodemographic factors (e.g., age, gender, education, and race/ethnicity), general health and functioning, worker's knowledge on reporting, job and employment characteristics (e.g., work hour, job tenure, work shift, type of occupation, and physical demand), psychosocial work environment (e.g., supervisor support, coworker support, and safety climate), and health care provider factors. From the review of qualitative studies, the reasons for underreporting included the following: fear or concern, cumbersome time and effort in the reporting process, lack of knowledge regarding reporting, perceptions of injuries as not severe or part of the job, and distrust of reporting consequences.

CONCLUSIONS

The review findings indicated that low wage earners, racial/ethnic minority workers, and workers who perceive a poor psychosocial work environment encounter more barriers to reporting a work-related injury or illness. This review also identified variations in the measurement of work-related injury reporting across studies and a lack of standardized measurement.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The review was registered in the PROSPERO, an international database of prospectively registered systematic reviews in health and social care (CRD42021284685).

What Factors Make EU Regulators Want to Communicate Drug Safety Issues Related to SGLT2 Inhibitors? An Online Survey Study

INTRODUCTION

Previous studies have found differences in the communication of safety issues among medicines regulatory agencies.

OBJECTIVES

To explore (1) to what extent regulators' opinions regarding the need to communicate safety issues related to sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors might be influenced by their concern about the safety issue, and (2) whether regulators' concerns might be influenced by certain characteristics of the safety issue or by the demographic and professional characteristics and attitudes of the regulators.

METHODS

An online cross-sectional survey study with a rating-based conjoint analysis among clinical and pharmacovigilance assessors from the EU regulatory network was performed between April and June 2021. Regulators were invited by email, and participants were asked about their level of concern and their opinion regarding the need to communicate about 12 scenarios defined by four characteristics: adverse drug reaction, source of information, causality, and frequency. The outcomes for the first objective were to update the summary of product characteristics (SmPC; yes/no) and to send direct healthcare professional communications (DHPC; yes/no). The determinant was regulators' level of concern (range 0-100%). The outcome of the second objective was regulators' level of concern, and the determinants were the characteristics of the safety issue, demographic and professional characteristics, and attitudes of the regulators (beliefs about medicines and risk perception).

RESULTS

A total of 222 regulators completed the survey (64% women; mean age 46 ± 10 years). Depending on the scenario, 54-94% and 25-74% of the participants would update the SmPC or send a DHPC, respectively. The participants' level of concern influenced their opinions regarding the need to update the SmPC and send a DHPC (odds ratio (OR) 13.0; 95% confidence interval (CI) 7.8-21.7 and OR 13.6; 95% CI 9.5-19.2, respectively, for every 10% increase in the level of concern). All characteristics of the safety issue influenced the level of concern. Younger participants, women, and those working for Eastern European agencies had a higher level of concern than older participants, men, and those working in other regions. Beliefs about medicines and general risk perception also influenced their concern.

CONCLUSIONS

The opinion regarding the need to communicate safety issues was influenced by the concern of regulators. Regulators' concern was influenced by the characteristics of the safety issue, demographic characteristics, and attitudes. Diverse groups of experts regarding such factors would ensure that various views are incorporated in risk communication decisions.

Cleaning in Times of Pandemic: Perceptions of COVID-19 Risks among Workers in Facility Services

Cleaning services are a transversal activity that guarantees the proper functioning and conditions of safety, hygiene, and health across all economic sectors. The COVID-19 pandemic increased the need for clean, sanitary spaces, particularly in health services and other areas with a large number of people. The workers in these services were often placed on the frontline without any specific training or information. Their low average schooling aggravated this situation. Therefore, exploring these workers’ perceptions about the COVID-19 pandemic and its potential influence on their mental health was the primary goal of our research. Structured interviews were conducted based on questionnaires in a sample of 436 women. Their characterisation focused on three aspects related to the pandemic. First, to prevent infecting others (85.5%) and that people close to them could die (86.0%) were the dominant concerns; second, the feeling of permanent vigilance was mentioned (56.2%); and third, the fear of not getting medical care (60.7%). Thus, the workers felt there was a need for more dissemination of individual protection measures, as well as more training, better general working conditions, and access to psychological counselling.