Interventions to increase the reporting of occupational diseases by physicians.

BACKGROUND: Under-reporting of occupational diseases is an important issue worldwide. The collection of reliable data is essential for public health officials to plan intervention programmes to prevent occupational diseases. Little is known about the effects of interventions for increasing the reporting of occupational diseases. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of interventions aimed at increasing the reporting of occupational diseases by physicians. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Occupational Safety and Health Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, OSH UPDATE, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), OpenSIGLE, and Health Evidence until January 2015.We also checked reference lists of relevant articles and contacted study authors to identify additional published, unpublished, and ongoing studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster-RCTs (cRCTs), controlled before-after (CBA) studies, and interrupted time series (ITS) of the effects of increasing the reporting of occupational diseases by physicians. The primary outcome was the reporting of occupational diseases measured as the number of physicians reporting or as the rate of reporting occupational diseases. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Pairs of authors independently assessed study eligibility and risk of bias and extracted data. We expressed intervention effects as risk ratios or rate ratios. We combined the results of similar studies in a meta-analysis. We assessed the overall quality of evidence for each combination of intervention and outcome using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included seven RCTs and five CBA studies. Six studies evaluated the effectiveness of educational materials alone, one study evaluated educational meetings, four studies evaluated a combination of the two, and one study evaluated a multifaceted educational campaign for increasing the reporting of occupational diseases by physicians. We judged all the included studies to have a high risk of bias.We did not find any studies evaluating the effectiveness of Internet-based interventions or interventions on procedures or techniques of reporting, or the use of financial incentives. Moreover, we did not find any studies evaluating large-scale interventions like the introduction of new laws, existing or new specific disease registries, newly established occupational health services, or surveillance systems. Educational materialsWe found moderate-quality evidence that the use of educational materials did not considerably increase the number of physicians reporting occupational diseases compared to no intervention (risk ratio of 1.11, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74 to 1.67). We also found moderate-quality evidence showing that sending a reminder message of a legal obligation to report increased the number of physicians reporting occupational diseases (risk ratio of 1.32, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.66) when compared to a reminder message about the benefits of reporting.We found low-quality evidence that the use of educational materials did not considerably increase the rate of reporting when compared to no intervention. Educational materials plus meetingsWe found moderate-quality evidence that the use of educational materials combined with meetings did not considerably increase the number of physicians reporting when compared to no intervention (risk ratio of 1.22, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.81).We found low-quality evidence that educational materials plus meetings did not considerably increase the rate of reporting when compared to no intervention (rate ratio of 0.77, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.41). Educational meetingsWe found very low-quality evidence showing that educational meetings increased the number of physicians reporting occupational diseases (risk ratio at baseline: 0.82, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.41 and at follow-up: 1.74, 95% CI 1.11 to 2.74) when compared to no intervention.We found very low-quality evidence that educational meetings did not considerably increase the rate of reporting occupational diseases when compared to no intervention (rate ratio at baseline: 1.57, 95% CI 1.22 to 2.02 and at follow-up: 1.92, 95% CI 1.48 to 2.47). Educational campaignWe found very low-quality evidence showing that the use of an educational campaign increased the number of physicians reporting occupational diseases when compared to no intervention (risk ratio at baseline: 0.53, 95% CI 0.19 to 1.50 and at follow-up: 11.59, 95% CI 5.97 to 22.49). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found 12 studies to include in this review. They provide evidence ranging from very low to moderate quality showing that educational materials, educational meetings, or a combination of the two do not considerably increase the reporting of occupational diseases. The use of a reminder message on the legal obligation to report might provide some positive results. We need high-quality RCTs to corroborate these findings.Future studies should investigate the effects of large-scale interventions like legislation, existing or new disease-specific registries, newly established occupational health services, or surveillance systems. When randomisation or the identification of a control group is impractical, these large-scale interventions should be evaluated using an interrupted time-series design.We also need studies assessing online reporting and interventions aimed at simplifying procedures or techniques of reporting and the use of financial incentives.

Annual incidence of occupational diseases in economic sectors in The Netherlands.

OBJECTIVE: To report the annual incidence of occupational diseases (ODs) in economic sectors in The Netherlands. METHODS: In a 5-year prospective cohort study (2009-2013), occupational physicians were asked to participate in a sentinel surveillance system for OD notification. The inclusion criteria for participation were (1) covering a population of employees, (2) reporting the economic sectors and the size of their employee population and (3) willingness to report all diagnosed ODs. In this study, an OD was defined as a disease with a specific clinical diagnosis that was predominantly caused by work-related factors. The economic sectors (n=21) were defined according the NACE (Nomenclature des Activités Économiques dans la Communauté Européenne) classification. RESULTS: In a total working population of 514,590 employees, 1782 ODs were reported over 12 months in 2009. The estimated annual incidence for any OD was 346 (95% CI 330 to 362) per 100,000 worker-years. Of all the ODs, mental diseases were reported most frequently (41%), followed by musculoskeletal (39%), hearing (11%), infectious (4%), skin (3%), neurological (2%) and respiratory (2%) diseases. The four economic sectors with the highest annual incidences per 100,000 workers were construction (1127; 95% CI 1002 to 1253), mining and quarrying (888; 95% CI 110 to 1667), water and waste processing (832; 95% CI 518 to 1146) and transport and storage (608; 95% CI 526 to 690). CONCLUSION: ODs are reported in all economic sectors in The Netherlands. Up to 91% of all ODs are mental, musculoskeletal and hearing diseases. Efforts to increase the effective assessment of ODs and compliance in reporting activities enhance the usability of incidence figures for the government, employers and workers.

Review on the validity of self-report to assess work-related diseases.

PURPOSE: Self-report is an efficient and accepted means of assessing population characteristics, risk factors, and diseases. Little is known on the validity of self-reported work-related illness as an indicator of the presence of a work-related disease. This study reviews the evidence on (1) the validity of workers' self-reported illness and (2) on the validity of workers' self-assessed work relatedness of an illness. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted in four databases (Medline, Embase, PsycINFO and OSH-Update). Two reviewers independently performed the article selection and data extraction. The methodological quality of the studies was evaluated, levels of agreement and predictive values were rated against predefined criteria, and sources of heterogeneity were explored. RESULTS: In 32 studies, workers' self-reports of health conditions were compared with the "reference standard" of expert opinion. We found that agreement was mainly low to moderate. Self-assessed work relatedness of a health condition was examined in only four studies, showing low-to-moderate agreement with expert assessment. The health condition, type of questionnaire, and the case definitions for both self-report and reference standards influence the results of validation studies. CONCLUSIONS: Workers' self-reported illness may provide valuable information on the presence of disease, although the generalizability of the findings is limited primarily to musculoskeletal and skin disorders. For case finding in a population at risk, e.g., an active workers' health surveillance program, a sensitive symptom questionnaire with a follow-up by a medical examination may be the best choice. Evidence on the validity of self-assessed work relatedness of a health condition is scarce. Adding well-developed questions to a specific medical diagnosis exploring the relationship between symptoms and work may be a good strategy.

Registration of work-related diseases, injuries, and complaints in Aruba, Bonaire, and Curaçao.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the incidence of work-related diseases, injuries, and complaints in Aruba, Bonaire, and Curaçao and to identify some next steps in the prevention process. METHODS: All of the three countries' 18 occupational health specialists were asked to participate; 100% agreed to report all work-related diseases, injuries, and complaints in 2004-2008. A standard online notification form was used to register cases in a database maintained by the Netherlands Center for Occupational Diseases (NCOD). The public health service of Curaçao analyzed the data and presented the results to the participating physicians during educational and feedback meetings. RESULTS: During the study period, 1 519 cases were reported: 720 (47.0%) work-related diseases; 515 (34.0%) injuries; and 284 (19.0%) complaints. The mean patient age was 42.4 years (range 16-70 years); 924 (60.8%) were males and 571 (37.6%), females. Most frequently reported were musculoskeletal diseases, injuries, and complaints; mental health disorders; and skin injuries. Analysis showed incidence rates of work-related diseases, injuries, and complaints in Aruba to be 157 new cases per 100 000 employee years; in Bonaire, 53/100 000; and in Curaçao, 437/100 000. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that labor protection laws need improvement and that preventive action should be fostered. Further study is needed on working conditions, preventive policy, and the quality of occupational health and safety practices in Aruba, Bonaire, and Curaçao. Funding is imperative for collecting and publishing accurate data, which will keep this problem on the social-political agenda.

Workplace interventions for treatment of occupational asthma.

BACKGROUND: The impact of workplace interventions on the outcome of occupational asthma is not well-understood. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of workplace interventions on the outcome of occupational asthma. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE; EMBASE; NIOSHTIC-2; CISDOC and HSELINE up to February 2011. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials, controlled before and after studies and interrupted time series of workplace interventions for occupational asthma. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed study eligibility and trial quality, and extracted data. MAIN RESULTS: We included 21 controlled before and after studies with 1447 participants that reported on 29 comparisons.In 15 studies, removal from exposure was compared with continued exposure. Removal increased the likelihood of reporting absence of symptoms (risk ratio (RR) 21.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) 7.20 to 63.77), improved forced expiratory volume (FEV1 %) (mean difference (MD) 5.52 percentage points, 95% CI 2.99 to 8.06) and decreased non-specific bronchial hyper-reactivity (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.67, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.21).In six studies, reduction of exposure was compared with continued exposure. Reduction increased the likelihood of reporting absence of symptoms (RR 5.35, 95% CI 1.40 to 20.48) but did not affect FEV1 % (MD 1.18 percentage points, 95% CI -2.96 to 5.32).In eight studies, removal from exposure was compared with reduction of exposure. Removal increased the likelihood of reporting absence of symptoms (RR 39.16, 95% CI 7.21 to 212.83) but did not affect FEV1 % (MD 1.16 percentage points, 95% CI -7.51 to 9.84).Two studies reported that the risk of unemployment after removal from exposure was increased compared with reduction of exposure (RR 14.3, 95% CI 2.06 to 99.16). Three studies reported loss of income of about 25% after removal from exposure.Overall the quality of the evidence was very low. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is very low-quality evidence that removal from exposure improves asthma symptoms and lung function compared with continued exposure.Reducing exposure also improves symptoms, but seems not as effective as complete removal.However, removal from exposure is associated with an increased risk of unemployment, whereas reduction of exposure is not. The clinical benefit of removal from exposure or exposure reduction should be balanced against the increased risk of unemployment. We need better studies to identify which interventions intended to reduce exposure give most benefit.

Information and feedback to improve occupational physicians' reporting of occupational diseases: a randomised controlled trial.

PURPOSE: To assess the effectiveness of supplying occupational physicians (OPs) with targeted and stage-matched information or with feedback on reporting occupational diseases to the national registry in the Netherlands. METHODS: In a randomized controlled design, 1076 OPs were divided into three groups based on previous reporting behaviour: precontemplators not considering reporting, contemplators considering reporting and actioners reporting occupational diseases. Precontemplators and contemplators were randomly assigned to receive stage-matched, stage-mismatched or general information. Actioners were randomly assigned to receive personalized or standardized feedback upon notification. Outcome measures were the number of OPs reporting and the number of reported occupational diseases in a 180-day period before and after the intervention. RESULTS: Precontemplators were significantly more male and self-employed compared to contemplators and actioners. There was no significant effect of stage-matched information versus stage-mismatched or general information on the percentage of reporting OPs and on the mean number of notifications in each group. Receiving any information affected reporting more in contemplators than in precontemplators. The mean number of notifications in actioners increased more after personalized feedback than after standardized feedback, but the difference was not significant. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports the concept that contemplators are more susceptible to receiving information but could not confirm an effect of stage-matching this information on reporting occupational diseases to the national registry.

Characteristics of national registries for occupational diseases: international development and validation of an audit tool (ODIT).

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to develop quality indicators that can be used for quality assessment of registries of occupational diseases in relation to preventive policy on a national level. The research questions were: 1. Which indicators determine the quality of national registries of occupational diseases with respect to their ability to provide appropriate information for preventive policy? 2. What are the criteria that can distinguish low quality from high quality? METHODS: First, we performed a literature search to assess which output of registries can be considered appropriate for preventive policy and to develop a set of preliminary indicators and criteria. Second, final indicators and criteria were assessed and their content validity was tested in a Delphi study, for which experts from the 25 EU Member States were invited. RESULTS: The literature search revealed two different types of information output to be appropriate for preventive policy: monitor and alert information. For the evaluation of the quality of the monitor and alert function we developed ten indicators and criteria. Sixteen of the twenty-five experts responded in the first round of the Delphi study, and eleven in the second round. Based on their comments, we assessed the final nine indicators: the completeness of the notification form, coverage of registration, guidelines or criteria for notification, education and training of reporting physicians, completeness of registration, statistical methods used, investigation of special cases, presentation of monitor information, and presentation of alert information. Except for the indicator "coverage of registration" for the alert function, all the indicators met the preset requirements of content validity. CONCLUSION: We have developed quality indicators and criteria to evaluate registries for occupational diseases on the ability to provide appropriate information for preventive policy on a national level. Together, these indicators form a tool which can be used for quality improvement of registries of occupational diseases.

Registration of work-related diseases, injuries, and complaints in Aruba, Bonaire, and Curaçao / Registro de enfermedades, lesiones y síntomas relacionados con el trabajo en Aruba, Bonaire y Curazao

OBJECTIVE: To estimate the incidence of work-related diseases, injuries, and complaints in Aruba, Bonaire, and Curaçao and to identify some next steps in the prevention process. METHODS: All of the three countries' 18 occupational health specialists were asked to participate; 100 percent agreed to report all work-related diseases, injuries, and complaints in 2004-2008. A standard online notification form was used to register cases in a database maintained by the Netherlands Center for Occupational Diseases (NCOD). The public health service of Curaçao analyzed the data and presented the results to the participating physicians during educational and feedback meetings. RESULTS: During the study period, 1 519 cases were reported: 720 (47.0 percent) work-related diseases; 515 (34.0 percent) injuries; and 284 (19.0 percent) complaints. The mean patient age was 42.4 years (range 16-70 years); 924 (60.8 percent) were males and 571 (37.6 percent), females. Most frequently reported were musculoskeletal diseases, injuries, and complaints; mental health disorders; and skin injuries. Analysis showed incidence rates of work-related diseases, injuries, and complaints in Aruba to be 157 new cases per 100 000 employee years; in Bonaire, 53/100 000; and in Curaçao, 437/100 000. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that labor protection laws need improvement and that preventive action should be fostered. Further study is needed on working conditions, preventive policy, and the quality of occupational health and safety practices in Aruba, Bonaire, and Curaçao. Funding is imperative for collecting and publishing accurate data, which will keep this problem on the social-political agenda.

OBJETIVO: Calcular la incidencia de enfermedades, lesiones y síntomas relacionados con el trabajo en Aruba, Bonaire y Curazao e identificar los pasos siguientes en el proceso de prevención. MÉTODOS: Se invitó a participar a los 18 especialistas en salud ocupacional de los tres países; todos aceptaron notificar todas las enfermedades, lesiones y síntomas relacionados con el trabajo entre el 2004 y el 2008. Se usó un formulario estándar de notificación en línea para registrar los casos en una base de datos mantenida por el Centro para las Enfermedades Ocupacionales de los Países Bajos. El servicio de salud pública de Curazao analizó los datos y presentó los resultados a los médicos participantes durante las reuniones educativas y de retroalimentación. RESULTADOS: Durante el período del estudio se notificaron 1 519 casos relacionados con el trabajo: 720 (47,0 por ciento) enfermedades, 515 (34,0 por ciento) lesiones y 284 (19,0 por ciento) síntomas. La edad promedio de los pacientes fue 42,4 años (recorrido, 16-70 años); 924 (60,8 por ciento) eran varones y 571 (37,6 por ciento), mujeres. Se notificaron con mayor frecuencia las enfermedades, lesiones y síntomas musculoesqueléticos; los trastornos mentales; y las lesiones cutáneas. El análisis mostró tasas de incidencia de enfermedades, lesiones y síntomas relacionados con el trabajo de 157 nuevos casos por 100 000 empleados por año en Aruba, 53/100 000 en Bonaire y 437/100 000 en Curazao. CONCLUSIONES: Estos resultados indican que las leyes de protección laboral deben mejorarse y que deben promoverse las medidas preventivas. Es necesario llevar a cabo otros estudios sobre las condiciones de trabajo, los planes de prevención y la calidad de la salud ocupacional y las prácticas de seguridad en Aruba, Bonaire y Curazao. Se requiere financiamiento para recopilar y publicar datos exactos, a fin de mantener este problema en la agenda política y social.