Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 20 de 62
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
País/Região como assunto
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Occup Environ Med ; 81(3): 163-166, 2024 Mar 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38360725

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Certain workers are at increased risk for acquiring Legionnaires' disease compared with other workers. This study aims to identify occupations at increased risk for acquiring Legionnaires' disease. METHODS: Using data from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's Supplemental Legionnaires' Disease Surveillance System, this study identified Legionnaires' disease confirmed patients ≥16 years of age in 39 states with reported symptom onset during 2014-2016. Age-adjusted and sex-adjusted incidence rate ratios (IRR) stratified by occupation group were calculated by comparing Legionnaires' disease patients in an occupation group (eg, transportation) to those in all other occupation groups (eg, non-transportation). RESULTS: A total of 2553 patients had a known occupation group. The two occupations with the highest burden were transportation (N=287; IRR=2.11) and construction (N=269; IRR=1.82). Truck drivers comprised the majority (69.7%) of the transportation occupation group and construction labourers comprised almost half (49%) of the construction occupation group. The healthcare support occupation had the highest IRR (N=75; IRR=2.16). CONCLUSION: Transportation and construction workers, who are generally not covered by guidance related to building water systems, have increased risk of Legionnaires' disease compared with other workers. One hypothesised risk factor for truck drivers is the use of non-genuine windshield cleaner in their vehicles. A simple intervention is to use genuine windshield cleaner with bactericidal properties (ie, includes isopropanol/methanol) which can reduce the risk of Legionella growth and transmission. To improve surveillance of Legionnaires' disease and identification of similar exposures, the authors encourage the collection of occupation and industry information for all patients with Legionnaires' disease.


Assuntos
Doença dos Legionários , Humanos , Doença dos Legionários/diagnóstico , Doença dos Legionários/epidemiologia , Doença dos Legionários/etiologia , Ocupações , Fatores de Risco , Meios de Transporte , Indústrias , Surtos de Doenças
2.
Am J Ind Med ; 66(7): 587-600, 2023 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37153939

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: While the occupational risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection for healthcare personnel in the United States has been relatively well characterized, less information is available on the occupational risk for workers employed in other settings. Even fewer studies have attempted to compare risks across occupations and industries. Using differential proportionate distribution as an approximation, we evaluated excess risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection by occupation and industry among non-healthcare workers in six states. METHODS: We analyzed data on occupation and industry of employment from a six-state callback survey of adult non-healthcare workers with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and population-based reference data on employment patterns, adjusted for the effect of telework, from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. We estimated the differential proportionate distribution of SARS-CoV-2 infection by occupation and industry using the proportionate morbidity ratio (PMR). RESULTS: Among a sample of 1111 workers with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, significantly higher-than-expected proportions of workers were employed in service occupations (PMR 1.3, 99% confidence interval [CI] 1.1-1.5) and in the transportation and utilities (PMR 1.4, 99% CI 1.1-1.8) and leisure and hospitality industries (PMR 1.5, 99% CI 1.2-1.9). CONCLUSIONS: We found evidence of significant differences in the proportionate distribution of SARS-CoV-2 infection by occupation and industry among respondents in a multistate, population-based survey, highlighting the excess risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection borne by some worker populations, particularly those whose jobs require frequent or prolonged close contact with other people.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Adulto , Humanos , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , COVID-19/epidemiologia , SARS-CoV-2 , Ocupações , Indústrias , Pessoal de Saúde
3.
Clin Infect Dis ; 75(Suppl 2): S216-S224, 2022 10 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35717638

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Surveillance systems lack detailed occupational exposure information from workers with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health partnered with 6 states to collect information from adults diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection who worked in person (outside the home) in non-healthcare settings during the 2 weeks prior to illness onset. METHODS: The survey captured demographic, medical, and occupational characteristics and work- and non-work-related risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Reported close contact with a person known or suspected to have SARS-CoV-2 infection was categorized by setting as exposure at work, exposure outside of work only, or no known exposure/did not know. Frequencies and percentages of exposure types are compared by respondent characteristics and risk factors. RESULTS: Of 1111 respondents, 19.4% reported exposure at work, 23.4% reported exposure outside of work only, and 57.2% reported no known exposure/did not know. Workers in protective service occupations (48.8%) and public administration industries (35.6%) reported exposure at work most often. More than one third (33.7%) of respondents who experienced close contact with ≥10 coworkers per day and 28.8% of respondents who experienced close contact with ≥10 customers/clients per day reported exposures at work. CONCLUSIONS: Exposure to occupational SARS-CoV-2 was common among respondents. Examining differences in exposures among different worker groups can help identify populations with the greatest need for prevention interventions. The benefits of recording employment characteristics as standard demographic information will remain relevant as new and reemerging public health issues occur.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Exposição Ocupacional , Saúde Ocupacional , Adulto , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Pessoal de Saúde , Humanos , Exposição Ocupacional/efeitos adversos , Fatores de Risco , SARS-CoV-2 , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia
4.
Am J Public Health ; 112(11): 1599-1610, 2022 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36223572

RESUMO

Objectives. To explore previous COVID-19 diagnosis and COVID-19 vaccination status among US essential worker groups. Methods. We analyzed the US Census Household Pulse Survey (May 26-July 5, 2021), a nationally representative sample of adults aged 18 years and older. We compared currently employed essential workers working outside the home with those working at home using adjusted prevalence ratios. We calculated proportion vaccinated and intention to be vaccinated, stratifying by essential worker and demographic groups for those who worked or volunteered outside the home since January 1, 2021. Results. The proportion of workers with previous COVID-19 diagnosis was highest among first responders (24.9%) working outside the home compared with workers who did not (13.3%). Workers in agriculture, forestry, fishing, and hunting had the lowest vaccination rates (67.5%) compared with all workers (77.8%). Those without health insurance were much less likely to be vaccinated across all worker groups. Conclusions. This study underscores the importance of improving surveillance to monitor COVID-19 and other infectious diseases among workers and identify and implement tailored risk mitigation strategies, including vaccination campaigns, for workplaces. (Am J Public Health. 2022;112(11):1599-1610. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2022.307010).


Assuntos
Vacinas contra a AIDS , COVID-19 , Vacinas contra Influenza , Vacinas contra Papillomavirus , Vacinas contra Vírus Sincicial Respiratório , Vacinas contra a SAIDS , Adulto , Vacina BCG , COVID-19/diagnóstico , COVID-19/epidemiologia , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Teste para COVID-19 , Vacinas contra COVID-19 , Vacina contra Difteria, Tétano e Coqueluche , Humanos , Intenção , Vacina contra Sarampo-Caxumba-Rubéola , Vacinação
5.
Am J Ind Med ; 65(7): 548-555, 2022 07.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35532007

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) produced an advisory list identifying essential critical infrastructure workers (ECIW) during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) response. The CISA advisory list is the most common national definition of ECIW but has not been mapped to United States (U.S.) Census industry codes (CICs) to readily identify these worker populations in public health data sources. METHODS: We identified essential critical infrastructure industry designations corresponding to v4.0 of the CISA advisory list for all six-digit North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes and cross-walked NAICS codes to CICs. CICs were grouped as essential, non-essential, or mixed essential/non-essential according to component NAICS industries. We also obtained national estimated population sizes for NAICS and Census industries and cross-tabulated Census industry and occupation codes to identify industry-occupation pairs. RESULTS: We produced and made publicly available spreadsheets containing essential industry designations corresponding to v4.0 of the CISA advisory list for NAICS and Census industry titles and codes and population estimates by six-digit NAICS industry, Census industry, and Census industry-occupation pair. The CISA advisory list is highly inclusive and contains most industries and U.S. workers; 71.0% of Census industries comprising 80.6% of workers and 80.7% of NAICS industries comprising 87.1% of workers were designated as essential. CONCLUSIONS: We identified workers in essential critical infrastructure industries as defined by CISA using standardized industry codes. These classifications may support public health interventions and analyses related to the COVID-19 pandemic and future public health crises.


Assuntos
COVID-19 , Pandemias , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Censos , Humanos , Indústrias , Ocupações , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia
6.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 70(7): 250-253, 2021 Feb 19.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33600383

RESUMO

Certain hazard controls, including physical barriers, cloth face masks, and other personal protective equipment (PPE), are recommended to reduce coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) transmission in the workplace (1). Evaluation of occupational hazard control use for COVID-19 prevention can identify inadequately protected workers and opportunities to improve use. CDC's National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health used data from the June 2020 SummerStyles survey to characterize required and voluntary use of COVID-19-related occupational hazard controls among U.S. non-health care workers. A survey-weighted regression model was used to estimate the association between employer provision of hazard controls and voluntary use, and stratum-specific adjusted risk differences (aRDs) among workers reporting household incomes <250% and ≥250% of national poverty thresholds were estimated to assess effect modification by income. Approximately one half (45.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 41.0%-50.3%) of non-health care workers reported use of hazard controls in the workplace, 55.5% (95% CI = 48.8%-62.2%) of whom reported employer requirements to use them. After adjustment for occupational group and proximity to others at work, voluntary use was approximately double, or 22.3 absolute percentage points higher, among workers who were provided hazard controls than among those who were not. This effect was more apparent among lower-income (aRD = 31.0%) than among higher-income workers (aRD = 16.3%). Employers can help protect workers from COVID-19 by requiring and encouraging use of occupational hazard controls and providing hazard controls to employees (1).


Assuntos
COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Programas Obrigatórios/estatística & dados numéricos , Doenças Profissionais/prevenção & controle , Saúde Ocupacional/estatística & dados numéricos , Programas Voluntários/estatística & dados numéricos , Adolescente , Adulto , Acessibilidade Arquitetônica/estatística & dados numéricos , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Máscaras/estatística & dados numéricos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Equipamento de Proteção Individual/estatística & dados numéricos , Inquéritos e Questionários , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Local de Trabalho/estatística & dados numéricos , Adulto Jovem
7.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 70(25): 916-921, 2021 Jun 25.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34166336

RESUMO

Workplace activities involving close contact with coworkers and customers can lead to transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19 (1,2). Information on the approach to and effectiveness of COVID-19 workplace investigations is limited. In May 2020, Public Health - Seattle & King County (PHSKC), King County, Washington established a COVID-19 workplace surveillance and response system to enhance COVID-19 contact tracing and identify outbreaks in workplaces. During June 15-November 15, 2020, a total of 2,881 workplaces in King County reported at least one case of COVID-19. Among 1,305 (45.3%) investigated workplaces,* 524 (40.3%) met the definition of a workplace outbreak.† Among 306 (58.4%) workplaces with complete data,§ an average of 4.4 employee COVID-19 cases¶ (median = three; range = 1-65) were identified per outbreak, with an average attack rate among employees of 17.5%. PHSKC and the Washington State Department of Health optimized resources by establishing a classification scheme to prioritize workplace investigations as high, medium, or low priority based on workplace features observed to be associated with increased COVID-19 spread and workforce features associated with severe disease outcomes. High-priority investigations were significantly more likely than medium- and low-priority investigations to have two or more cases among employees (p<0.001), two or more cases not previously linked to the workplace (p<0.001), or two or more exposed workplace contacts not previously identified during case interviews (p = 0.002). Prioritization of workplace investigations allowed for the allocation of limited resources to effectively conduct workplace investigations to limit the potential workplace spread of COVID-19. Workplace investigations can also serve as an opportunity to provide guidance on preventing workplace exposures to SARS-CoV-2, facilitate access to vaccines, and strengthen collaborations between public health and businesses.


Assuntos
COVID-19/epidemiologia , Saúde Ocupacional , Vigilância em Saúde Pública , COVID-19/transmissão , Busca de Comunicante , Humanos , Relações Interprofissionais , Washington/epidemiologia , Local de Trabalho
8.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 69(13): 361-365, 2020 Apr 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32240124

RESUMO

Approximately 2.8 million nonfatal workplace illnesses and injuries were reported in the United States in 2018 (1). Current surveillance methods might underestimate the prevalence of occupational injuries and illnesses (2,3). One way to obtain more information on occupational morbidity is to assess workers' perceptions about whether they have ever experienced health problems related to work (4). Occupational exposures might directly cause, contribute to, exacerbate, or predispose workers to various health problems (work-related health problems). CDC's National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health estimated the lifetime prevalence of self-reported, work-related health problems for the currently employed population overall and stratified by various demographic and job characteristics using data from the 2018 version of the SummerStyles survey. Overall, 35.1% of employed respondents had ever experienced a work-related health problem (95% confidence interval [CI] = 33.0%-37.3%). The most commonly reported work-related health problem was back pain (19.4%, 95% CI = 17.6%-21.2%). Among industries, construction (48.6%, 95% CI = 36.54%-60.58%) had the highest prevalence of any work-related health problems. Workplace injury and illness prevention programs are needed to reduce the prevalence of work-related health problems, especially in higher-risk industries.


Assuntos
Doenças Profissionais/epidemiologia , Traumatismos Ocupacionais/epidemiologia , Vigilância da População , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Prevalência , Autorrelato , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Adulto Jovem
9.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 69(27): 853-858, 2020 Jul 10.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32644979

RESUMO

During a pandemic, syndromic methods for monitoring illness outside of health care settings, such as tracking absenteeism trends in schools and workplaces, can be useful adjuncts to conventional disease reporting (1,2). Each month, CDC's National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) monitors the prevalence of health-related workplace absenteeism among currently employed full-time workers in the United States, overall and by demographic and occupational subgroups, using data from the Current Population Survey (CPS).* This report describes trends in absenteeism during October 2019-April 2020, including March and April 2020, the period of rapidly accelerating transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Overall, the prevalence of health-related workplace absenteeism in March and April 2020 were similar to their 5-year baselines. However, compared with occupation-specific baselines, absenteeism among workers in several occupational groups that define or contain essential critical infrastructure workforce† categories was significantly higher than expected in April. Significant increases in absenteeism were observed in personal care and service§ (includes child care workers and personal care aides); healthcare support¶; and production** (includes meat, poultry, and fish processing workers). Although health-related workplace absenteeism remained relatively unchanged or decreased in other groups, the increase in absenteeism among workers in occupational groups less able to avoid exposure to SARS-CoV-2 (3) highlights the potential impact of COVID-19 on the essential critical infrastructure workforce because of the risks and concerns of occupational transmission of SARS-CoV-2. More widespread and complete collection of occupational data in COVID-19 surveillance is required to fully understand workers' occupational risks and inform intervention strategies. Employers should follow available recommendations to protect workers' health.


Assuntos
Absenteísmo , Infecções por Coronavirus/epidemiologia , Ocupações/estatística & dados numéricos , Pandemias , Pneumonia Viral/epidemiologia , Licença Médica/estatística & dados numéricos , Adolescente , Adulto , COVID-19 , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia
10.
Emerg Infect Dis ; 25(3): 397-405, 2019 03.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30789129

RESUMO

Workers in specific settings and activities are at increased risk for certain infectious diseases. When an infectious disease case occurs in a worker, investigators need to understand the mechanisms of disease propagation in the workplace. Few publications have explored these factors in the United States; a literature search yielded 66 investigations of infectious disease occurring in US workplaces during 2006-2015. Reported cases appear to be concentrated in specific industries and occupations, especially the healthcare industry, laboratory workers, animal workers, and public service workers. A hierarchy-of-controls approach can help determine how to implement effective preventive measures in workplaces. Consideration of occupational risk factors and control of occupational exposures will help prevent disease transmission in the workplace and protect workers' health.


Assuntos
Doenças Transmissíveis/epidemiologia , Doenças Transmissíveis/etiologia , Doenças Profissionais/epidemiologia , Doenças Profissionais/etiologia , Exposição Ocupacional/efeitos adversos , Local de Trabalho , Controle de Doenças Transmissíveis , Doenças Transmissíveis/história , História do Século XXI , Humanos , Doenças Profissionais/história , Doenças Profissionais/prevenção & controle , Saúde Ocupacional , Equipamento de Proteção Individual , Fatores de Risco , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia
11.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 68(27): 604-607, 2019 Jul 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31295233

RESUMO

Secondhand tobacco smoke (SHS) exposure contributes to ill health and disease, including heart disease, lung cancer, and stroke (1). Although cigarette smoking has declined among U.S. workers, workplace exposure to SHS remains high, particularly among workers in certain industries, such as construction (2,3). Implementation of smoke-free laws has proven to be beneficial in reducing SHS exposure in general (1). CDC analyzed data from the 2015 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) Occupational Health Supplement to assess the prevalence of self-reported workplace SHS exposure among nonsmoking workers by smoke-free policy status in the workers' states of residence and in detailed industry categories and subcategories. In 2015, 19.9% of nonsmoking workers reported any exposure to SHS at work during the 12 months preceding the interview, and 10.1% reported frequent exposure (twice a week or more). Nonsmoking workers who resided in states with comprehensive smoke-free laws in all three categories of venues (private worksites, bars, and restaurants) were least likely to report frequent exposure to workplace SHS. Nonsmoking workers employed in the commercial and industrial machinery and equipment repair and maintenance industry reported the highest prevalences of any workplace SHS exposure (65.1%), whereas the construction industry had the highest reported number of exposed workers (2.9 million); these industry categories/subcategories include outdoor workplaces and other settings that are unlikely to be protected by smoke-free laws. Identifying specific at-risk workplaces and implementing targeted intervention strategies could help reduce SHS exposure at work and protect workers' health.


Assuntos
não Fumantes , Exposição Ocupacional/estatística & dados numéricos , Poluição por Fumaça de Tabaco/estatística & dados numéricos , Local de Trabalho , Indústria da Construção , Emprego/estatística & dados numéricos , Humanos , Exposição Ocupacional/efeitos adversos , Saúde Ocupacional , Prevalência , Restaurantes , Autorrelato , Política Antifumo/legislação & jurisprudência , Estados Unidos
12.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 68(26): 577-582, 2019 Jul 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31269013

RESUMO

During an influenza pandemic and during seasonal epidemics, more persons have symptomatic illness without seeking medical care than seek treatment at doctor's offices, clinics, and hospitals (1). Consequently, surveillance based on mortality, health care encounters, and laboratory data does not reflect the full extent of influenza morbidity. CDC uses a mathematical model to estimate the total number of influenza illnesses in the United States (1). In addition, syndromic methods for monitoring illness outside health care settings, such as tracking absenteeism trends in schools and workplaces, are important adjuncts to conventional disease reporting (2). Every month, CDC's National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) monitors the prevalence of health-related workplace absenteeism among full-time workers in the United States using data from the Current Population Survey (CPS) (3). This report describes the results of workplace absenteeism surveillance analyses conducted during the high-severity 2017-18 influenza season (October 2017-September 2018) (4). Absenteeism increased sharply in November, peaked in January and, at its peak, was significantly higher than the average during the previous five seasons. Persons especially affected included male workers, workers aged 45-64 years, workers living in U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Region 6* and Region 9,† and those working in management, business, and financial; installation, maintenance, and repair; and production and related occupations. Public health authorities and employers might consider results from relevant absenteeism surveillance analyses when developing prevention messages and in pandemic preparedness planning. The most effective ways to prevent influenza transmission in the workplace include vaccination and nonpharmaceutical interventions, such as staying home when sick, covering coughs and sneezes, washing hands frequently, and routinely cleaning frequently touched surfaces (5).


Assuntos
Absenteísmo , Emprego/estatística & dados numéricos , Epidemias , Influenza Humana/epidemiologia , Pandemias , Vigilância da População/métodos , Local de Trabalho , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Modelos Teóricos , Prevalência , Estações do Ano , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Adulto Jovem
13.
Med Mycol ; 57(Supplement_1): S41-S45, 2019 Feb 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30690596

RESUMO

Workers in Coccidioides-endemic areas performing soil-disturbing work or exposed to windy and dusty conditions are at increased risk for coccidioidomycosis. Four occupational coccidioidomycosis outbreaks from 2007 to 2014 in California are described, involving construction workers in a number of excavation projects and an outdoor filming event involving cast and crew. These outbreaks highlight the importance of identifying industries and occupations at high risk for coccidioidomycosis, conducting targeted occupational health surveillance to assess the burden of illness, developing and implementing prevention strategies, and setting research priorities.


Assuntos
Coccidioidomicose/epidemiologia , Surtos de Doenças/estatística & dados numéricos , Monitoramento Epidemiológico , Doenças Profissionais/epidemiologia , California/epidemiologia , Coccidioidomicose/prevenção & controle , Humanos , Doenças Profissionais/microbiologia , Doenças Profissionais/prevenção & controle , Fatores de Risco , Microbiologia do Solo , Local de Trabalho
14.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 67(33): 925-930, 2018 Aug 24.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30138306

RESUMO

The opioid epidemic affects multiple segments of the U.S. population (1). Occupational patterns might be critical to understanding the epidemic. Opioids are often prescribed for specific types of work-related injuries, which vary by occupation* (2). CDC used mortality data from the National Occupational Mortality Surveillance (NOMS) system to examine unintentional or undetermined drug overdose mortality within 26 occupation groups. This study included data from the 21 U.S. states participating in NOMS during 2007-2012.† Drug overdose mortality was compared with total mortality using proportional mortality ratios (PMRs) indirectly standardized for age, sex, race, year, and state. Mortality patterns specific to opioid-related overdose deaths were also assessed. Construction occupations had the highest PMRs for drug overdose deaths and for both heroin-related and prescription opioid-related overdose deaths. The occupation groups with the highest PMRs from methadone, natural and semisynthetic opioids, and synthetic opioids other than methadone were construction, extraction (e.g., mining, oil and gas extraction), and health care practitioners. The workplace is an integral part of life for the majority of the adult U.S. population; incorporating workplace research and interventions likely will benefit the opioid epidemic response.


Assuntos
Acidentes/estatística & dados numéricos , Analgésicos Opioides/intoxicação , Overdose de Drogas/mortalidade , Ocupações/estatística & dados numéricos , Vigilância da População , Adulto , Indústria da Construção/estatística & dados numéricos , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia
15.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 67(1): 1-6, 2018 Jan 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29324727

RESUMO

Repeated exposure to occupational ergonomic hazards, such as frequent exertion (repetitive bending or twisting) and frequent standing, can lead to injuries, most commonly musculoskeletal disorders (1). Work-related musculoskeletal disorders have been estimated to cost the United States approximately $2.6 billion in annual direct and indirect costs (2). A recent literature review provided evidence that prolonged standing at work also leads to adverse health outcomes, such as back pain, physical fatigue, and muscle pain (3). To determine which industry and occupation groups currently have the highest prevalence rates of frequent exertion at work and frequent standing at work, CDC analyzed data from the 2015 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) Occupational Health Supplement (OHS) regarding currently employed adults in the United States. By industry, the highest prevalence of both frequent exertion and frequent standing at work was among those in the agriculture, forestry, fishing, and hunting industry group (70.9%); by occupation, the highest prevalence was among those in the construction and extraction occupation group (76.9%). Large differences among industry and occupation groups were found with regard to these ergonomic hazards, suggesting a need for targeted interventions designed to reduce workplace exposure.


Assuntos
Indústrias/estatística & dados numéricos , Ocupações/estatística & dados numéricos , Esforço Físico , Postura , Trabalho , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estados Unidos , Adulto Jovem
16.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 66(36): 955-958, 2017 Sep 15.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28910275

RESUMO

Campylobacter and Cryptosporidium are two common causes of gastroenteritis in the United States. National incidence rates measured for these pathogens in 2015 were 17.7 and 3.0 per 100,000 population, respectively; Nebraska was among the states with the highest incidence for both campylobacteriosis (26.6) and cryptosporidiosis (≥6.01) (1). Although campylobacteriosis and cryptosporidiosis are primarily transmitted via consumption of contaminated food or water, they can also be acquired through contact with live animals or animal products, including through occupational exposure (2). This exposure route is of particular interest in Nebraska, where animal agriculture and associated industries are an important part of the state's economy. To estimate the percentage of disease that might be related to occupational animal exposure in Nebraska, the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services (NDHHS) and CDC reviewed deidentified investigation reports from 2005 to 2015 of cases of campylobacteriosis and cryptosporidiosis among Nebraska residents aged ≥14 years. Case investigation notes were searched for evidence of occupational animal exposures, which were classified into discrete categories based on industry, animal/meat, and specific work activity/exposure. Occupational animal exposure was identified in 16.6% of 3,352 campylobacteriosis and 8.7% of 1,070 cryptosporidiosis cases, among which animal production (e.g., farming or ranching) was the most commonly mentioned industry type (68.2% and 78.5%, respectively), followed by employment in animal slaughter and processing facilities (16.3% and 5.4%, respectively). Among animal/meat occupational exposures, cattle/beef was most commonly mentioned, with exposure to feedlots (concentrated animal feeding operations in which animals are fed on stored feeds) reported in 29.9% of campylobacteriosis and 7.9% of cryptosporidiosis cases. Close contact with animals and manure in feedlots and other farm settings might place workers in these areas at increased risk for infection. It is important to educate workers with occupational animal exposure about the symptoms of enteric diseases and prevention measures. Targeting prevention strategies to high-risk workplaces and activities could help reduce disease.


Assuntos
Infecções por Campylobacter/epidemiologia , Criptosporidiose/epidemiologia , Doenças Profissionais/epidemiologia , Exposição Ocupacional/efeitos adversos , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Animais , Bovinos , Feminino , Humanos , Incidência , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Nebraska/epidemiologia , Fatores de Risco , Adulto Jovem
17.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 66(27): 718-722, 2017 Jul 14.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28704346

RESUMO

Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and Parkinson's disease, both progressive neurodegenerative diseases, affect >1 million Americans (1,2). Consistently reported risk factors for ALS include increasing age, male sex, and cigarette smoking (1); risk factors for Parkinson's disease include increasing age, male sex, and pesticide exposure, whereas cigarette smoking and caffeine consumption are inversely associated (2). Relative to cancer or respiratory diseases, the role of occupation in neurologic diseases is much less studied and less well understood (3). CDC evaluated associations between usual occupation and ALS and Parkinson's disease mortality using data from CDC's National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) National Occupational Mortality Surveillance (NOMS), a population-based surveillance system that includes approximately 12.1 million deaths from 30 U.S. states.* Associations were estimated using proportionate mortality ratios (PMRs), standardizing indirectly by age, sex, race, and calendar year to the standard population of all NOMS deaths with occupation information. Occupations associated with higher socioeconomic status (SES) had elevated ALS and Parkinson's disease mortality. The shifts in the U.S. workforce toward older ages and higher SES occupations† highlight the importance of understanding this finding, which will require studies with designs that provide evidence for causality, detailed exposure assessment, and adjustment for additional potential confounders.


Assuntos
Esclerose Lateral Amiotrófica/mortalidade , Disparidades nos Níveis de Saúde , Ocupações/estatística & dados numéricos , Doença de Parkinson/mortalidade , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Classe Social , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Adulto Jovem
18.
MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep ; 66(32): 850-853, 2017 Aug 18.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28817554

RESUMO

Campylobacter and Salmonella are leading causes of bacterial gastroenteritis in the United States and are estimated to cause >1 million episodes of domestically acquired illness annually (1). Campylobacter and Salmonella are primarily transmitted through contaminated food, but animal-to-human and human-to-human transmission can also occur (2,3). Although occupationally acquired infections have been reported, occupational risk factors have rarely been studied. In 2015, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) identified 63 suspected or confirmed cases of Campylobacter infection over 3.5 years at a poultry-processing plant (Kathleen Fagan, OSHA, personal communication, December 2015); most involved new workers handling chickens in the "live hang" area where bacterial contamination is likely to be the highest. These findings were similar to those of a previous study of Campylobacter infections among workers at another poultry-processing plant (4). The investigation led to discussions among OSHA, state health departments, and CDC's National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH); and a surveillance study was initiated to further explore the disease incidence in poultry-processing plant workers and identify any additional occupations at increased risk for common enteric infections. Deidentified reports of campylobacteriosis and salmonellosis among Maryland, Ohio, and Virginia residents aged ≥16 years were obtained and reviewed. Each employed patient was classified into one of 23 major occupational groups using the 2010 Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) system.* Risk ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for associations between each occupational group and each disease were calculated to identify occupations potentially at increased risk, contrasting each group with all other occupations. In 2014, a total of 2,977 campylobacteriosis and 2,259 salmonellosis cases were reported. Among the 1,772 (60%) campylobacteriosis and 1,516 (67%) salmonellosis cases in patients for whom occupational information was available, 1,064 (60%) and 847 (56%), respectively, were employed. Persons in farming, fishing, and forestry as well as health care and technical occupations were at significantly increased risk for both campylobacteriosis and salmonellosis compared with all other occupations. Targeting education and prevention strategies could help reduce disease, and improving the systematic collection of occupational information in disease surveillance systems could provide a better understanding of the extent of occupationally acquired diseases.


Assuntos
Infecções por Campylobacter/epidemiologia , Doenças Profissionais/epidemiologia , Ocupações/estatística & dados numéricos , Infecções por Salmonella/epidemiologia , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Animais , Galinhas , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Maryland/epidemiologia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Ohio/epidemiologia , Fatores de Risco , Virginia/epidemiologia , Adulto Jovem
19.
Am J Ind Med ; 59(4): 290-300, 2016 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26818136

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Hearing loss and tinnitus are two potentially debilitating physical conditions affecting many people in the United States. The purpose of this study was to estimate the prevalence of hearing difficulty, tinnitus, and their co-occurrence within U.S. METHODS: Data from the 2007 National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) were examined. Weighted prevalence and adjusted prevalence ratios for self-reported hearing difficulty, tinnitus, and their co-occurrence were estimated and compared by demographic, among workers with and without occupational noise exposure, and across industries and occupations. RESULTS: Seven percent of U.S. workers never exposed to occupational noise had hearing difficulty, 5% had tinnitus and 2% had both conditions. However, among workers who had ever been exposed to occupational noise, the prevalence was 23%, 15%, and 9%, respectively (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Hearing difficulty and tinnitus are prevalent in the U.S.; especially among noise-exposed workers. Improved strategies for hearing conservation or better implementation are needed.


Assuntos
Perda Auditiva/epidemiologia , Doenças Profissionais/epidemiologia , Zumbido/epidemiologia , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Estudos Transversais , Feminino , Inquéritos Epidemiológicos , Perda Auditiva/etiologia , Humanos , Indústrias , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Ruído Ocupacional/efeitos adversos , Doenças Profissionais/etiologia , Exposição Ocupacional/efeitos adversos , Ocupações , Prevalência , Zumbido/etiologia , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Adulto Jovem
20.
Am J Public Health ; 105 Suppl 3: e33-40, 2015 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25905837

RESUMO

OBJECTIVES: We characterized workplace secondhand smoke exposure among nonsmoking women of reproductive age as a proxy for workplace secondhand smoke exposure during pregnancy. METHODS: We included nonsmoking women aged 18 to 44 years employed during the past 12 months who participated in the 2010 National Health Interview Survey. We estimated the prevalence of workplace secondhand smoke exposure and its associations with sociodemographic and workplace characteristics. RESULTS: Nine percent of women reported workplace secondhand smoke exposure. Prevalence decreased with increasing age, education, and earnings. Workplace secondhand smoke exposure was associated with chemical exposure (prevalence odds ratio [POR] = 3.3; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.3, 4.7); being threatened, bullied, or harassed (POR = 3.2; 95% CI = 2.1, 5.1); vapors, gas, dust, or fume exposure (POR = 3.1; 95% CI = 2.3, 4.4); and worrying about unemployment (POR = 3.0; 95% CI = 1.8, 5.2), among other things. CONCLUSIONS: Comprehensive smoke-free laws covering all workers could eliminate inequities in workplace secondhand smoke exposure, including during pregnancy.


Assuntos
Exposição Ocupacional/efeitos adversos , Poluição por Fumaça de Tabaco/efeitos adversos , Mulheres Trabalhadoras , Adolescente , Adulto , Estudos Transversais , Feminino , Humanos , Ocupações , Gravidez , Prevalência , Fatores de Risco , Fatores Socioeconômicos , Estados Unidos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA