Occupational Health Barriers in South Africa: A Call for Ubuntu.

Many low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) grapple with shortages of health workers, a crucial component of robust health systems. The COVID-19 pandemic underscored the imperative for appropriate staffing of health systems and the occupational health (OH) threats to health workers. Issues related to accessibility, coverage, and utilization of OH services in public sector health facilities within LMICs were particularly accentuated during the pandemic. This paper draws on the observations and experiences of researchers engaged in an international collaboration to consider how the South African concept of Ubuntu provides a promising way to understand and address the challenges encountered in establishing and sustaining OH services in public sector health facilities. Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, the collaborators actively participated in implementing and studying OH and infection prevention and control measures for health workers in South Africa and internationally as part of the World Health Organizations' Collaborating Centres for Occupational Health. The study identified obstacles in establishing, providing, maintaining and sustaining such measures during the pandemic. These challenges were attributed to lack of leadership/stewardship, inadequate use of intelligence systems for decision-making, ineffective health and safety committees, inactive trade unions, and the strain on occupational health professionals who were incapacitated and overworked. These shortcomings are, in part, linked to the absence of the Ubuntu philosophy in implementation and sustenance of OH services in LMICs.

The prevalences and levels of occupational exposure to dusts and/or fibres (silica, asbestos and coal): A systematic review and meta-analysis from the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates of the Work-related Burden of Disease and Injury.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Labour Organization (ILO) are developing joint estimates of the work-related burden of disease and injury (WHO/ILO Joint Estimates), with contributions from a large number of individual experts. Evidence from human, animal and mechanistic data suggests that occupational exposure to dusts and/or fibres (silica, asbestos and coal dust) causes pneumoconiosis. In this paper, we present a systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalences and levels of occupational exposure to silica, asbestos and coal dust. These estimates of prevalences and levels will serve as input data for estimating (if feasible) the number of deaths and disability-adjusted life years that are attributable to occupational exposure to silica, asbestos and coal dust, for the development of the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to systematically review and meta-analyse estimates of the prevalences and levels of occupational exposure to silica, asbestos and coal dust among working-age (≥ 15 years) workers. DATA SOURCES: We searched electronic academic databases for potentially relevant records from published and unpublished studies, including Ovid Medline, PubMed, EMBASE, and CISDOC. We also searched electronic grey literature databases, Internet search engines and organizational websites; hand-searched reference lists of previous systematic reviews and included study records; and consulted additional experts. STUDY ELIGIBILITY AND CRITERIA: We included working-age (≥ 15 years) workers in the formal and informal economy in any WHO and/or ILO Member State but excluded children (< 15 years) and unpaid domestic workers. We included all study types with objective dust or fibre measurements, published between 1960 and 2018, that directly or indirectly reported an estimate of the prevalence and/or level of occupational exposure to silica, asbestos and/or coal dust. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: At least two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts against the eligibility criteria at a first stage and full texts of potentially eligible records at a second stage, then data were extracted from qualifying studies. We combined prevalence estimates by industrial sector (ISIC-4 2-digit level with additional merging within Mining, Manufacturing and Construction) using random-effects meta-analysis. Two or more review authors assessed the risk of bias and all available authors assessed the quality of evidence, using the ROB-SPEO tool and QoE-SPEO approach developed specifically for the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates. RESULTS: Eighty-eight studies (82 cross-sectional studies and 6 longitudinal studies) met the inclusion criteria, comprising > 2.4 million measurements covering 23 countries from all WHO regions (Africa, Americas, Eastern Mediterranean, South-East Asia, Europe, and Western Pacific). The target population in all 88 included studies was from major ISCO groups 3 (Technicians and Associate Professionals), 6 (Skilled Agricultural, Forestry and Fishery Workers), 7 (Craft and Related Trades Workers), 8 (Plant and Machine Operators and Assemblers), and 9 (Elementary Occupations), hereafter called manual workers. Most studies were performed in Construction, Manufacturing and Mining. For occupational exposure to silica, 65 studies (61 cross-sectional studies and 4 longitudinal studies) were included with > 2.3 million measurements collected in 22 countries in all six WHO regions. For occupational exposure to asbestos, 18 studies (17 cross-sectional studies and 1 longitudinal) were included with > 20,000 measurements collected in eight countries in five WHO regions (no data for Africa). For occupational exposure to coal dust, eight studies (all cross-sectional) were included comprising > 100,000 samples in six countries in five WHO regions (no data for Eastern Mediterranean). Occupational exposure to silica, asbestos and coal dust was assessed with personal or stationary active filter sampling; for silica and asbestos, gravimetric assessment was followed by technical analysis. Risk of bias profiles varied between the bodies of evidence looking at asbestos, silica and coal dust, as well as between industrial sectors. However, risk of bias was generally highest for the domain of selection of participants into the studies. The largest bodies of evidence for silica related to the industrial sectors of Construction (ISIC 41-43), Manufacturing (ISIC 20, 23-25, 27, 31-32) and Mining (ISIC 05, 07, 08). For Construction, the pooled prevalence estimate was 0.89 (95% CI 0.84 to 0.93, 17 studies, I2 91%, moderate quality of evidence) and the level estimate was rated as of very low quality of evidence. For Manufacturing, the pooled prevalence estimate was 0.85 (95% CI 0.78 to 0.91, 24 studies, I2 100%, moderate quality of evidence) and the pooled level estimate was rated as of very low quality of evidence. The pooled prevalence estimate for Mining was 0.75 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.82, 20 studies, I2 100%, moderate quality of evidence) and the pooled level estimate was 0.04 mg/m3 (95% CI 0.03 to 0.05, 17 studies, I2 100%, low quality of evidence). Smaller bodies of evidence were identified for Crop and animal production (ISIC 01; very low quality of evidence for both prevalence and level); Professional, scientific and technical activities (ISIC 71, 74; very low quality of evidence for both prevalence and level); and Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply (ISIC 35; very low quality of evidence for both prevalence and level). For asbestos, the pooled prevalence estimate for Construction (ISIC 41, 43, 45,) was 0.77 (95% CI 0.65 to 0.87, six studies, I2 99%, low quality of evidence) and the level estimate was rated as of very low quality of evidence. For Manufacturing (ISIC 13, 23-24, 29-30), the pooled prevalence and level estimates were rated as being of very low quality of evidence. Smaller bodies of evidence were identified for Other mining and quarrying (ISIC 08; very low quality of evidence for both prevalence and level); Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply (ISIC 35; very low quality of evidence for both prevalence and level); and Water supply, sewerage, waste management and remediation (ISIC 37; very low quality of evidence for levels). For coal dust, the pooled prevalence estimate for Mining of coal and lignite (ISIC 05), was 1.00 (95% CI 1.00 to 1.00, six studies, I2 16%, moderate quality of evidence) and the pooled level estimate was 0.77 mg/m3 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.86, three studies, I2 100%, low quality of evidence). A small body of evidence was identified for Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply (ISIC 35); with very low quality of evidence for prevalence, and the pooled level estimate being 0.60 mg/m3 (95% CI -6.95 to 8.14, one study, low quality of evidence). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, we judged the bodies of evidence for occupational exposure to silica to vary by industrial sector between very low and moderate quality of evidence for prevalence, and very low and low for level. For occupational exposure to asbestos, the bodies of evidence varied by industrial sector between very low and low quality of evidence for prevalence and were of very low quality of evidence for level. For occupational exposure to coal dust, the bodies of evidence were of very low or moderate quality of evidence for prevalence, and low for level. None of the included studies were population-based studies (i.e., covered the entire workers' population in the industrial sector), which we judged to present serious concern for indirectness, except for occupational exposure to coal dust within the industrial sector of mining of coal and lignite. Selected estimates of the prevalences and levels of occupational exposure to silica by industrial sector are considered suitable as input data for the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates, and selected estimates of the prevalences and levels of occupational exposure to asbestos and coal dust may perhaps also be suitable for estimation purposes. Protocol identifier: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2018.06.005. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018084131.

New global indicator for workers' health: mortality rate from diseases attributable to selected occupational risk factors.

Through sustainable development goals 3 and 8 and other policies, countries have committed to protect and promote workers' health by reducing the work-related burden of disease. To monitor progress on these commitments, indicators that capture the work-related burden of disease should be available for monitoring workers' health and sustainable development. The World Health Organization and the International Labour Organization estimate that only 363 283 (19%) of 1 879 890 work-related deaths globally in 2016 were due to injuries, whereas 1 516 607 (81%) deaths were due to diseases. Most monitoring systems focusing on workers' health or sustainable development, such as the global indicator framework for the sustainable development goals, include an indicator on the burden of occupational injuries. Few such systems, however, have an indicator on the burden of work-related diseases. To address this gap, we present a new global indicator: mortality rate from diseases attributable to selected occupational risk factors, by disease, risk factor, sex and age group. We outline the policy rationale of the indicator, describe its data sources and methods of calculation, and report and analyse the official indicator for 183 countries. We also provide examples of the use of the indicator in national workers' health monitoring systems and highlight the indicator's strengths and limitations. We conclude that integrating the new indicator into monitoring systems will provide more comprehensive and accurate surveillance of workers' health, and allow harmonization across global, regional and national monitoring systems. Inequalities in workers' health can be analysed and the evidence base can be improved towards more effective policy and systems on workers' health.

Par le biais des objectifs de développement durable 3 et 8 ainsi que d'autres mesures, plusieurs pays se sont engagés à protéger et promouvoir la santé des travailleurs en réduisant l'impact des maladies liées au travail. Mais pour évaluer leurs progrès en la matière, il convient de mettre en place des indicateurs estimant l'impact des maladies liées au travail afin de placer le développement durable et la santé des travailleurs sous surveillance. D'après l'Organisation mondiale de la Santé et l'Organisation internationale du Travail, seulement 363 283 (19%) des 1 879 890 décès liés au travail dans le monde en 2016 découlaient de blessures, tandis que 1 516 607 (81%) d'entre eux étaient causés par des maladies. La plupart des systèmes de surveillance qui s'intéressent à la santé des travailleurs ou au développement durable, comme le cadre mondial d'indicateurs pour les objectifs de développement durable, comportent un indicateur relatif à l'impact des accidents de travail. Cependant, rares sont ceux qui possèdent un indicateur concernant l'impact des maladies professionnelles. Pour combler cette lacune, nous dévoilons un nouvel indicateur mondial: le taux de mortalité dû aux maladies attribuables à certains facteurs de risque professionnels classé par maladie, facteur de risque, sexe et catégorie d'âge. Nous exposons le motif politique de l'indicateur, décrivons l'origine des données et les méthodes de calcul, et communiquons et analysons l'indicateur officiel pour 183 pays. Nous fournissons également des exemples de la façon dont l'indicateur peut être utilisé dans des systèmes nationaux de surveillance de la santé des travailleurs et soulignons ses forces et faiblesses. Nous concluons en affirmant que l'intégration de ce nouvel indicateur dans les systèmes de surveillance offrira un suivi plus complet et précis de la santé des travailleurs et ouvrira la voie à une harmonisation des systèmes mondiaux, nationaux et régionaux. Il est possible d'analyser les inégalités en matière de santé des travailleurs et d'en améliorer les bases factuelles afin d'établir des politiques et systèmes plus efficaces dans ce domaine.

A través de los objetivos de desarrollo sostenible 3 y 8 y de otras políticas, los países se han comprometido a proteger y promover la salud de los trabajadores reduciendo la carga de morbilidad relacionada con el trabajo. Para supervisar los avances en el cumplimiento de estos compromisos, debería disponerse de indicadores que reflejen la carga de morbilidad relacionada con el trabajo, a fin de controlar la salud de los trabajadores y el desarrollo sostenible. La Organización Mundial de la Salud y la Organización Internacional del Trabajo estiman que solo 363 283 (19%) de las 1 879 890 muertes relacionadas con el trabajo a nivel mundial en 2016 se debieron a lesiones, mientras que 1 516 607 (81%) muertes se debieron a enfermedades. La mayoría de los sistemas de vigilancia centrados en la salud de los trabajadores o el desarrollo sostenible, como el marco de indicadores mundiales para los objetivos de desarrollo sostenible, incluyen un indicador sobre la carga de las lesiones laborales. No obstante, pocos de estos sistemas cuentan con un indicador sobre la carga de las enfermedades relacionadas con el trabajo. Para subsanar esta carencia, presentamos un nuevo indicador mundial: la tasa de mortalidad por enfermedades atribuibles a factores de riesgo laborales seleccionados, por enfermedad, factor de riesgo, sexo y grupo de edad. Describimos la justificación política del indicador, describimos sus fuentes de datos y métodos de cálculo, e informamos y analizamos el indicador oficial para 183 países. También proporcionamos ejemplos del uso del indicador en los sistemas nacionales de vigilancia de la salud de los trabajadores y destacamos las ventajas y las limitaciones del indicador. Concluimos que la integración del nuevo indicador en los sistemas de vigilancia proporcionará una vigilancia más exhaustiva y precisa de la salud de los trabajadores, y permitirá la armonización entre los sistemas de vigilancia mundiales, regionales y nacionales. Se podrán analizar las desigualdades en la salud de los trabajadores y se podrá mejorar la base de evidencias para lograr políticas y sistemas más eficaces en materia de salud de los trabajadores.

Protecting healthcare workers during a pandemic: what can a WHO collaborating centre research partnership contribute?

Objectives: To ascertain whether and how working as a partnership of two World Health Organization collaborating centres (WHOCCs), based respectively in the Global North and Global South, can add insights on "what works to protect healthcare workers (HCWs) during a pandemic, in what contexts, using what mechanism, to achieve what outcome". Methods: A realist synthesis of seven projects in this research program was carried out to characterize context (C) (including researcher positionality), mechanism (M) (including service relationships) and outcome (O) in each project. An assessment was then conducted of the role of the WHOCC partnership in each study and overall. Results: The research found that lower-resourced countries with higher economic disparity, including South Africa, incurred greater occupational health risk and had less acceptable measures to protect HCWs at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic than higher-income more-equal counterpart countries. It showed that rigorously adopting occupational health measures can indeed protect the healthcare workforce; training and preventive initiatives can reduce workplace stress; information systems are valued; and HCWs most at-risk (including care aides in the Canadian setting) can be readily identified to trigger adoption of protective actions. The C-M-O analysis showed that various ways of working through a WHOCC partnership not only enabled knowledge sharing, but allowed for triangulating results and, ultimately, initiatives for worker protection. Conclusions: The value of an international partnership on a North-South axis especially lies in providing contextualized global evidence regarding protecting HCWs as a pandemic emerges, particularly with bi-directional cross-jurisdiction participation by researchers working with practitioners.

Protecting healthcare workers during a pandemic: what can a WHO collaborating centre research partnership contribute?

[ABSTRACT]. Objectives. To ascertain whether and how working as a partnership of two World Health Organization collabo- rating centres (WHOCCs), based respectively in the Global North and Global South, can add insights on “what works to protect healthcare workers (HCWs) during a pandemic, in what contexts, using what mechanism, to achieve what outcome”. Methods. A realist synthesis of seven projects in this research program was carried out to characterize context (C) (including researcher positionality), mechanism (M) (including service relationships) and outcome (O) in each project. An assessment was then conducted of the role of the WHOCC partnership in each study and overall. Results. The research found that lower-resourced countries with higher economic disparity, including South Africa, incurred greater occupational health risk and had less acceptable measures to protect HCWs at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic than higher-income more-equal counterpart countries. It showed that rig- orously adopting occupational health measures can indeed protect the healthcare workforce; training and preventive initiatives can reduce workplace stress; information systems are valued; and HCWs most at-risk (including care aides in the Canadian setting) can be readily identified to trigger adoption of protective actions. The C-M-O analysis showed that various ways of working through a WHOCC partnership not only enabled knowledge sharing, but allowed for triangulating results and, ultimately, initiatives for worker protection. Conclusions. The value of an international partnership on a North-South axis especially lies in providing con- textualized global evidence regarding protecting HCWs as a pandemic emerges, particularly with bi-directional cross-jurisdiction participation by researchers working with practitioners.

[RESUMEN]. Objetivos. Determinar si la asociación de dos centros colaboradores de la Organización Mundial de la Salud, ubicados uno en el hemisferio norte y el otro en el hemisferio sur, puede aportar información sobre “qué es necesario para proteger a los trabajadores de salud durante una pandemia, en qué contextos, con qué mecanismos, con el objetivo de lograr qué resultados”. Métodos. Se realizó una síntesis realista de siete proyectos en este programa de investigación para carac- terizar el contexto (C) (incluida la posición del investigador), el mecanismo (M) (incluidas las relaciones de servicio) y el resultado (R) en cada proyecto. A continuación, se realizó una evaluación del papel que desem- peñó la alianza de centros colaboradores de la OMS en términos generales y en cada estudio. Resultados. En la investigación se encontró que los países de escasos recursos con mayor disparidad económica, como Sudáfrica, incurrieron en un mayor riesgo para la salud ocupacional y tenían medidas menos aceptables para proteger a los trabajadores de salud al inicio de la pandemia de COVID-19 que los países homólogos de mayores ingresos y mayor equidad. Se de mostró que la adopción rigurosa de medidas de salud ocupacional puede proteger al personal de salud; la capacitación y las iniciativas preventivas pueden reducir el estrés en el lugar de trabajo; los sistemas de información se consideran valiosos; y los trabajadores de salud de mayor riesgo (como los asistentes de atención en el entorno canadiense) pueden identificarse con facilidad para la adopción de medidas de protección. El análisis de C-M-R mostró que las diferentes formas de trabajar por medio de una alianza de centros colaboradores de la OMS no solo facilitaron el inter- cambio de conocimientos, sino que además permitieron triangular los resultados y, en última instancia, las iniciativas para la protección de los trabajadores. Conclusiones. El valor de una alianza internacional radica especialmente en proporcionar evidencia mundial contextualizada sobre la protección de los trabajadores de salud cuando surge una situación de pandemia, particularmente con la participación bidireccional entre distintas jurisdicciones de investigadores que traba- jan con el personal de salud.

[RESUMO]. Objetivo. Determinar se, e como, o trabalho em parceria entre dois centros colaboradores da Organização Mundial da Saúde (OMS), localizados no Norte e no Sul global, pode contribuir com conhecimento sobre “o que é eficaz para proteger os trabalhadores da saúde em uma pandemia, em que contextos, com que mecanismos e para obter quais resultados”. Métodos. Foi realizada uma síntese realista de sete projetos de pesquisa do programa da OMS para determi- nar o contexto (C) (incluindo a posicionalidade dos pesquisadores), o mecanismo (M) (incluindo as relações entre os serviços) e o resultado (O, do inglês outcome) de cada projeto e avaliar o papel da parceria entre os centros colaboradores em cada estudo e em geral. Resultados. Este estudo demonstrou que, nos países de baixa renda com maior desigualdade econômica (por exemplo, na África do Sul), o risco à saúde ocupacional foi maior e as medidas adotadas para proteger os trabalhadores da saúde na pandemia de COVID-19 foram menos adequadas em comparação ao obser- vado em países comparáveis de alta renda com menor desigualdade. Verificou-se que a adoção rigorosa de medidas de saúde ocupacional efetivamente protege os trabalhadores da saúde, e que iniciativas de pre- venção e capacitação dos profissionais reduzem o estresse no trabalho. Também se reconhece a importância dos sistemas de informação e que o pessoal com maior risco de exposição ao vírus (incluindo os cuidadores auxiliares, no caso do Canadá) pode ser prontamente identificado para que sejam adotadas medidas de proteção. A análise do tipo C-M-O indicou que as diferentes formas de trabalho em parceria entre os cen- tros colaboradores possibilitaram não apenas dividir conhecimentos, mas também compartilhar resultados e, sobretudo, iniciativas para a proteção dos trabalhadores da saúde. Conclusões. A parceria internacional no eixo Norte-Sul é particularmente importante para obter evidências globais contextualizadas relativas à proteção dos trabalhadores da saúde em uma situação de pandemia, com a participação bidirecional entre foros de pesquisadores que trabalham com o pessoal da saúde.

Factors associated with TB screening among agricultural workers in Limpopo Province, South Africa.

BACKGROUND: Tuberculosis (TB) continues to be a public health issue of concern in South Africa. Workers in the agricultural sector are generally at increased risk of TB due to multiple interacting factors such as exposure to silica dust, co-worker infection, and occupations falling within the lower socio-economic sectors. OBJECTIVE: This study investigates factors associated with TB screening uptake for agricultural workers in Limpopo Province, South Africa. METHOD: This cross-sectional study targeted a study population of 16,787 agricultural workers across 96 agricultural worksites in South Africa. A two-stage cluster random sampling design identified 24 agricultural worksites and a potential 2500 participants. The outcome variable was self-reported TB screening. Descriptive statistics and unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression analyses were performed to determine factors associated with TB screening. A literature review informed the selection of covariates as possible confounders. RESULTS: The final study sample comprised 2144 workers across 24 sites, with 55% being women. TB screening uptake was 1155 (56.3%). Factors such as living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) (AOR 3.16, 95% CI: 2.44-4.09), accessing health services in the workplace (AOR 1.94, 95% CI: 1.09-3.46), and having prior TB knowledge (AOR 18.45, 95% CI: 9.8-34.74) were positively associated with TB screening. Participants in the age group 36-49 years had significantly higher odds of self-reporting TB screening, compared with those aged 18-25 years (AOR 1.37, 95% CI 1.07-1.77). Migrant workers from Mozambique (OR 0.52, 95% CI: 0.34-0.79) and Zimbabwe (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.57-0.89) were significantly less likely to self-report TB screening compared to their South African counterparts. CONCLUSION: The findings underscore the importance of workplace health services in achieving end-TB targets. We recommend programs and interventions for preventing TB in South Africa that target the agricultural sector in general, and in particular migrant workers.

Strengthening Social Compact and Innovative Health Sector Collaborations in Addressing COVID-19 in South African Workplaces.

Workplaces are nodes for Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 transmission and require strategies to protect workers' health. This article reports on the South African national coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) strategy that sought to ensure workers' health, protect the economic activity, safeguard livelihoods and support health services. Data from the Occupational Health Surveillance System, Surveillance System of Sentinel Hospital Sites, and government databases (public sector health worker and Compensation Fund data) was supplemented by peer-reviewed articles and grey literature. A multipronged, multi-stakeholder response to occupational health and safety (OHS) policy development, risk management, health surveillance, information, and training was adopted, underpinned by scientific input, through collaboration between government, organized labour, employer bodies, academia, and community partners. This resulted in government-promulgated legislation addressing OHS, sectoral guidelines, and work-related COVID-19 worker's compensation. The OHS Workstream of the National Department of Health provided leadership and technical support for COVID-specific workplace guidelines and practices, surveillance, information, and training, as well as a workplace-based vaccination strategy.

Protecting healthcare workers during a pandemic: what can a WHO collaborating centre research partnership contribute? / Protección de los trabajadores de salud durante una pandemia: ¿qué puede aportar una alianza para la investigación entre centros colaboradores de la OMS? / Proteção dos trabalhadores da saúde em uma pandemia: qual seria a contribuição de uma parceria de pesquisa entre centros colaboradores da OMS?

ABSTRACT Objectives. To ascertain whether and how working as a partnership of two World Health Organization collaborating centres (WHOCCs), based respectively in the Global North and Global South, can add insights on "what works to protect healthcare workers (HCWs) during a pandemic, in what contexts, using what mechanism, to achieve what outcome". Methods. A realist synthesis of seven projects in this research program was carried out to characterize context (C) (including researcher positionality), mechanism (M) (including service relationships) and outcome (O) in each project. An assessment was then conducted of the role of the WHOCC partnership in each study and overall. Results. The research found that lower-resourced countries with higher economic disparity, including South Africa, incurred greater occupational health risk and had less acceptable measures to protect HCWs at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic than higher-income more-equal counterpart countries. It showed that rigorously adopting occupational health measures can indeed protect the healthcare workforce; training and preventive initiatives can reduce workplace stress; information systems are valued; and HCWs most at-risk (including care aides in the Canadian setting) can be readily identified to trigger adoption of protective actions. The C-M-O analysis showed that various ways of working through a WHOCC partnership not only enabled knowledge sharing, but allowed for triangulating results and, ultimately, initiatives for worker protection. Conclusions. The value of an international partnership on a North-South axis especially lies in providing contextualized global evidence regarding protecting HCWs as a pandemic emerges, particularly with bi-directional cross-jurisdiction participation by researchers working with practitioners.

RESUMEN Objetivos. Determinar si la asociación de dos centros colaboradores de la Organización Mundial de la Salud, ubicados uno en el hemisferio norte y el otro en el hemisferio sur, puede aportar información sobre "qué es necesario para proteger a los trabajadores de salud durante una pandemia, en qué contextos, con qué mecanismos, con el objetivo de lograr qué resultados". Métodos. Se realizó una síntesis realista de siete proyectos en este programa de investigación para caracterizar el contexto (C) (incluida la posición del investigador), el mecanismo (M) (incluidas las relaciones de servicio) y el resultado (R) en cada proyecto. A continuación, se realizó una evaluación del papel que desempeñó la alianza de centros colaboradores de la OMS en términos generales y en cada estudio. Resultados. En la investigación se encontró que los países de escasos recursos con mayor disparidad económica, como Sudáfrica, incurrieron en un mayor riesgo para la salud ocupacional y tenían medidas menos aceptables para proteger a los trabajadores de salud al inicio de la pandemia de COVID-19 que los países homólogos de mayores ingresos y mayor equidad. Se de mostró que la adopción rigurosa de medidas de salud ocupacional puede proteger al personal de salud; la capacitación y las iniciativas preventivas pueden reducir el estrés en el lugar de trabajo; los sistemas de información se consideran valiosos; y los trabajadores de salud de mayor riesgo (como los asistentes de atención en el entorno canadiense) pueden identificarse con facilidad para la adopción de medidas de protección. El análisis de C-M-R mostró que las diferentes formas de trabajar por medio de una alianza de centros colaboradores de la OMS no solo facilitaron el intercambio de conocimientos, sino que además permitieron triangular los resultados y, en última instancia, las iniciativas para la protección de los trabajadores. Conclusiones. El valor de una alianza internacional radica especialmente en proporcionar evidencia mundial contextualizada sobre la protección de los trabajadores de salud cuando surge una situación de pandemia, particularmente con la participación bidireccional entre distintas jurisdicciones de investigadores que trabajan con el personal de salud.

RESUMO Objetivo. Determinar se, e como, o trabalho em parceria entre dois centros colaboradores da Organização Mundial da Saúde (OMS), localizados no Norte e no Sul global, pode contribuir com conhecimento sobre "o que é eficaz para proteger os trabalhadores da saúde em uma pandemia, em que contextos, com que mecanismos e para obter quais resultados". Métodos. Foi realizada uma síntese realista de sete projetos de pesquisa do programa da OMS para determinar o contexto (C) (incluindo a posicionalidade dos pesquisadores), o mecanismo (M) (incluindo as relações entre os serviços) e o resultado (O, do inglês outcome) de cada projeto e avaliar o papel da parceria entre os centros colaboradores em cada estudo e em geral. Resultados. Este estudo demonstrou que, nos países de baixa renda com maior desigualdade econômica (por exemplo, na África do Sul), o risco à saúde ocupacional foi maior e as medidas adotadas para proteger os trabalhadores da saúde na pandemia de COVID-19 foram menos adequadas em comparação ao observado em países comparáveis de alta renda com menor desigualdade. Verificou-se que a adoção rigorosa de medidas de saúde ocupacional efetivamente protege os trabalhadores da saúde, e que iniciativas de prevenção e capacitação dos profissionais reduzem o estresse no trabalho. Também se reconhece a importância dos sistemas de informação e que o pessoal com maior risco de exposição ao vírus (incluindo os cuidadores auxiliares, no caso do Canadá) pode ser prontamente identificado para que sejam adotadas medidas de proteção. A análise do tipo C-M-O indicou que as diferentes formas de trabalho em parceria entre os centros colaboradores possibilitaram não apenas dividir conhecimentos, mas também compartilhar resultados e, sobretudo, iniciativas para a proteção dos trabalhadores da saúde. Conclusões. A parceria internacional no eixo Norte-Sul é particularmente importante para obter evidências globais contextualizadas relativas à proteção dos trabalhadores da saúde em uma situação de pandemia, com a participação bidirecional entre foros de pesquisadores que trabalham com o pessoal da saúde.

Systematizing Information Use to Address Determinants of Health Worker Health in South Africa: A Cross-sectional Mixed Method Study.

Background: Recognizing that access to safe and healthy working conditions is a human right, the World Health Organization (WHO) calls for specific occupational safety and health (OSH) programs for health workers (HWs). The WHO health systems' building blocks, and the International Labour Organization (ILO), highlight the importance of information as part of effective systems. This study examined how OSH stakeholders access, use, and value an occupational health information system (OHIS). Methods: A cross-sectional survey of OSH stakeholders was conducted as part of a larger quasi experimental study in four teaching hospitals. The study hospitals and participants were purposefully selected and data collected using a modified questionnaire with both closed and open-ended questions. Quantitative analysis was conducted and themes identified for qualitative analysis. Ethics approval was provided by the University of Pretoria and University of British Columbia. Results: There were 71 participants comprised of hospital managers, health and safety representatives, trade unions representatives and OSH professionals. At least 42% reported poor accessibility and poor timeliness of OHIS for decision-making. Only 50% had access to computers and 27% reported poor computer skills. When existing, OHIS was poorly organized and needed upgrades, with 85% reporting the need for significant reforms. Only 45% reported use of OHIS for decision-making in their OSH role. Conclusion: Given the gap in access and utilization of information needed to protect worker's rights to a safe and healthy workplace, more attention is warranted to OHIS development and use as well as education and training in South Africa and beyond.

Impacts of economic inequality on healthcare worker safety at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic: cross-sectional analysis of a global survey.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the extent to which protection of healthcare workers (HCWs) as COVID-19 emerged was associated with economic inequality among and within countries. DESIGN: Cross-sectional analysis of associations of perceptions of workplace risk acceptability and mitigation measure adequacy with indicators of respondents' respective country's economic income level (World Bank assessment) and degree of within-country inequality (Gini index). SETTING: A global self-administered online survey. PARTICIPANTS: 4977 HCWs and healthcare delivery stakeholders from 161 countries responded to health and safety risk questions and a subset of 4076 (81.2%) answered mitigation measure questions. The majority (65%) of study participants were female. RESULTS: While the levels of risk being experienced at the pandemic's onset were consistently deemed as unacceptable across all groupings, participants from countries with less income inequality were somewhat less likely to report unacceptable levels of risk to HCWs regarding both workplace environment (OR=0.92, p=0.012) and workplace organisational factors (OR=0.93, p=0.017) compared with counterparts in more unequal national settings. In contrast, considerable variation existed in the degree to which mitigation measures were considered adequate. Adjusting for other influences through a logistic regression analysis, respondents from lower middle-income and low-income countries were comparatively much more likely to assess both occupational health and safety (OR=10.91, p≤0.001) and infection prevention and control (IPC) (OR=6.61, p=0.001) protection measures as inadequate, despite much higher COVID-19 rates in wealthier countries at the time of the survey. Greater within-country income inequality was also associated with perceptions of less adequate IPC measures (OR=0.94, p=0.025). These associations remained significant when accounting for country-level differences in occupational and gender composition of respondents, including specifically when only female care providers, our study's largest and most at-risk subpopulation, were examined. CONCLUSIONS: Economic inequality threatens resilience of health systems that rely on health workers working safely to provide needed care during emerging pandemics.

A Mixed-Methods Study of Risk Factors and Experiences of Health Care Workers Tested for the Novel Coronavirus in Canada.

OBJECTIVE: The aims of this study were to investigate occupational and non-work-related risk factors of coronavirus disease 2019 among health care workers (HCWs) in Vancouver Coastal Health, British Columbia, Canada, and to examine how HCWs described their experiences. METHODS: This was a matched case-control study using data from online and phone questionnaires with optional open-ended questions completed by HCWs who sought severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 testing between March 2020 and March 2021. Conditional logistic regression and thematic analysis were utilized. RESULTS: Providing direct care to coronavirus disease 2019 patients during the intermediate cohort period (adjusted odds ratio, 1.90; 95% confidence interval, 1.04 to 3.46) and community exposure to a known case in the late cohort period (adjusted odds ratio, 3.595%; confidence interval, 1.86 to 6.83) were associated with higher infection odds. Suboptimal communication, mental stress, and situations perceived as unsafe were common sources of dissatisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Varying levels of risk between occupational groups call for wider targeting of infection prevention measures. Strategies for mitigating community exposure and supporting HCW resilience are required.

The Utility of Length of Mining Service and Latency in Predicting Silicosis among Claimants to a Compensation Trust.

In the wake of a large burden of silicosis and tuberculosis among ex-miners from the South African gold mining industry, several programmes have been engaged in examining and compensating those at risk of these diseases. Availability of a database from one such programme, the Q(h)ubeka Trust, provided an opportunity to examine the accuracy of length of service in predicting compensable silicosis, and the concordance between self-reported employment and that officially recorded. Compensable silicosis was determined by expert panels, with ILO profusion ≥1/0 as the threshold for compensability. Age, officially recorded and self-reported years of service, and years since first and last service of 3146 claimants for compensable silicosis were analysed. Self-reported and recorded service were moderately correlated (R = 0.66, 95% confidence interval 0.64−0.68), with a Bland−Altman plot showing no systematic bias. There was reasonably high agreement with 75% of the differences being less than two years. Logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic curve analysis were used to test prediction of compensable silicosis. There was little predictive difference between length of service on its own and a model adjusting for length of service, age, and years since last exposure. Predictive accuracy was moderate, with significant potential misclassification. Twenty percent of claimants with compensable silicosis had a length of service <10 years; in almost all these claims, the interval between last exposure and the claim was 10 years or more. In conclusion, self-reported service length in the absence of an official service record could be accepted in claims with compatible clinical findings. Length of service offers, at best, moderate predictive capability for silicosis. Relatively short service compensable silicosis, when combined with at least 10 years since last exposure, was not uncommon.

HIV and TB Workplace Program for Street Vendors: A Situational Analysis.

In South Africa, 15 percent of informal economy workers are street vendors. The organization of occupational health services in the country is fragmented and does not cover informal workers. Conditions of work make informal workers extremely vulnerable to human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and tuberculosis (TB) exposure. In this study, a qualitative risk assessment was conducted among street vendors, followed by focus group discussions. Interpretation of data was according to major themes extracted from discussions. Workers are exposed to several occupational health hazards identified during the risk assessment. There is a lack of workplace HIV and TB services and overall poor access to healthcare. Street vendors, especially females, are at higher risk of HIV, due to gender inequalities. Comprehensive gender-sensitive training on occupational health and safety, HIV, and TB should be prioritized. To reach Universal Health Coverage and achieve the Sustainable Developmental Goals' targets, the health system should improve services for informal economy workers.

Organizational factors associated with health worker protection during the COVID-19 pandemic in four provinces of South Africa.

BACKGROUND: Health workers, in short supply in many low-and-middle-income countries, are at increased risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. This study aimed to assess how South Africa, prepared to protect its health workers from SARS-CoV-2 infection. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study design applying participatory action research in four provinces of South Africa. A semi-structured questionnaire and a qualitative observational HealthWISE walkthrough risk assessment was carried out to collect data on occupational safety and health (OSH) systems in 45 hospitals across four provinces to identify factors associated with health worker protection. Adapting the International Labour Organization (ILO) and World Health Organization (WHO) HealthWISE tool, we compiled compliance scores through walkthrough surveys. We used logistic regression to analyze the relationship between readiness indicators and the actual implementation of protective measures. RESULTS: We found that health facilities in all four provinces had SARS-CoV-2 plans for the general population but no comprehensive OHS plan for health workers. Provincial Departments of Health (PDoH) varied in how they were organized to respond: Provinces A and D had an OSH SARS-CoV-2 provincial coordinating team and a dedicated budget for occupational health; Province A had an occupational health doctor and nurse; while Province B had an occupational health nurse; Province A and D PDoHs had functional OSH committees; and Province D had conducted some health risk assessments specific to SARS-CoV-2. However, none of the assessed health facilities had an acceptable HealthWISE compliance score (≥ 75%) due to poor ventilation and inadequate administrative control measures. While the supply of personal protective equipment was adequate, it was often not worn properly. Our study found that having an OSH SARS-CoV-2 policy was significantly associated with higher personal protective equipment and ventilation scores. In addition, our analysis showed that hospitals with higher compliance scores had significantly lower infection rates (IRR 0.98; 95% CI: 0.97, 0.98). CONCLUSIONS: Despite some initial preparedness, greater effort to protect health workers is still warranted. Low-and-middle-income countries may need to pay more attention to OSH systems and consider using tools, such as ILO/WHO HealthWISE tool, to protect health workers' health.

A health worker knowledge, attitudes and practices survey of SARS-CoV-2 infection prevention and control in South Africa.

BACKGROUND: Health workers are crucial to the successful implementation of infection prevention and control strategies to limit the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 at healthcare facilities. The aim of our study was to determine SARS-CoV-2 infection prevention and control knowledge and attitudes of frontline health workers in four provinces of South Africa as well as explore some elements of health worker and health facility infection prevention and control practices. METHODS: A cross-sectional study design was utilised. The study population comprised both clinical and non-clinical staff working in casualty departments, outpatient departments, and entrance points of health facilities. A structured self-administered questionnaire was developed using the World Health Organization guidance as the basis for the knowledge questions. COVID-19 protocols were observed during data collection. RESULTS: A total of 286 health workers from 47 health facilities at different levels of care participated in the survey. The mean score on the 10 knowledge items was 6.3 (SD = 1.6). Approximately two-thirds of participants (67.4%) answered six or more questions correctly while less than a quarter of all participants (24.1%) managed to score eight or more. A knowledge score of 8 or more was significantly associated with occupational category (being either a medical doctor or nurse), age (< 40 years) and level of hospital (tertiary level). Only half of participants (50.7%) felt adequately prepared to deal with patients with COVD-19 at the time of the survey. The health workers displaying attitudes that would put themselves or others at risk were in the minority. Only 55.6% of participants had received infection prevention and control training. Some participants indicated they did not have access to medical masks (11.8%) and gloves (9.9%) in their departments. CONCLUSIONS: The attitudes of participants reflected a willingness to engage in appropriate SARS-CoV-2 infection prevention and control practices as well as a commitment to be involved in COVID-19 patient care. Ensuring adequate infection prevention and control training for all staff and universal access to appropriate PPE were identified as key areas that needed to be addressed. Interim and final reports which identified key shortcomings that needed to be addressed were provided to the relevant provincial departments of health.

Preventing Occupational Tuberculosis in Health Workers: An Analysis of State Responsibilities and Worker Rights in Mozambique.

Given the very high incidence of tuberculosis (TB) among health workers in Mozambique, a low-income country in Southern Africa, implementation of measures to protect health workers from occupational TB remains a major challenge. This study explores how Mozambique's legal framework and health system governance facilitate-or hinder-implementation of protective measures in its public (state-provided) healthcare sector. Using a mixed-methods approach, we examined international, constitutional, regulatory, and policy frameworks. We also recorded and analysed the content of a workshop and policy discussion group on the topic to elicit the perspectives of health workers and of officials responsible for implementing workplace TB policies. We found that despite a well-developed legal framework and national infection prevention and control policy, a number of implementation barrier persisted: lack of legal codification of TB as an occupational disease; absence of regulations assigning specific responsibilities to employers; failure to deal with privacy and stigma fears among health workers; and limited awareness among health workers of their legal rights, including that of collective action. While all these elements require attention to protect health workers from occupational TB, a stronger emphasis on their human and labour rights is needed alongside their perceived responsibilities as caregivers.

Empowering Health Workers to Protect Their Own Health: A Study of Enabling Factors and Barriers to Implementing HealthWISE in Mozambique, South Africa, and Zimbabwe.

Ways to address the increasing global health workforce shortage include improving the occupational health and safety of health workers, particularly those in high-risk, low-resource settings. The World Health Organization and International Labour Organization designed HealthWISE, a quality improvement tool to help health workers identify workplace hazards to find and apply low-cost solutions. However, its implementation had never been systematically evaluated. We, therefore, studied the implementation of HealthWISE in seven hospitals in three countries: Mozambique, South Africa, and Zimbabwe. Through a multiple-case study and thematic analysis of data collected primarily from focus group discussions and questionnaires, we examined the enabling factors and barriers to the implementation of HealthWISE by applying the integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (i-PARiHS) framework. Enabling factors included the willingness of workers to engage in the implementation, diverse teams that championed the process, and supportive senior leadership. Barriers included lack of clarity about how to use HealthWISE, insufficient funds, stretched human resources, older buildings, and lack of incident reporting infrastructure. Overall, successful implementation of HealthWISE required dedicated local team members who helped facilitate the process by adapting HealthWISE to the workers' occupational health and safety (OHS) knowledge and skill levels and the cultures and needs of their hospitals, cutting across all constructs of the i-PARiHS framework.

WHO/ILO work-related burden of disease and injury: Protocol for systematic reviews of occupational exposure to dusts and/or fibres and of the effect of occupational exposure to dusts and/or fibres on pneumoconiosis.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Labour Organization (ILO) are developing a joint methodology for estimating the national and global work-related burden of disease and injury (WHO/ILO joint methodology), with contributions from a large network of experts. In this paper, we present the protocol for two systematic reviews of parameters for estimating the number of deaths and disability-adjusted life years attributable to pneumoconiosis from occupational exposure to dusts and/or fibres, to inform the development of the WHO/ILO joint methodology. OBJECTIVES: We aim to systematically review studies on occupational exposure to dusts and/or fibres (Systematic Review 1) and systematically review and meta-analyse estimates of the effect of occupational exposure to dusts and/or fibres on pneumoconiosis (Systematic Review 2), applying the Navigation Guide systematic review methodology as an organizing framework. DATA SOURCES: Separately for Systematic Reviews 1 and 2, we will search electronic academic databases for potentially relevant records from published and unpublished studies, including Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science and CISDOC. We will also search electronic grey literature databases, Internet search engines and organizational websites; hand-search reference list of previous systematic reviews and included study records; and consult additional experts. STUDY ELIGIBILITY AND CRITERIA: We will include working-age (≥15 years) study participants in the formal and informal economy in any WHO and/or ILO Member State but exclude children (<15 years) and unpaid domestic workers. Eligible risk factors will be dusts and/or fibres from: (i) asbestos; (ii) silica; and/or (iii) coal (defined as pure coal dust and/or dust from coal mining). Included outcomes will be (i) asbestosis; (ii) silicosis; (iii) coal worker pneumoconiosis; and (iv) unspecified pneumoconiosis. For Systematic Review 1, we will include quantitative prevalence studies of occupational exposure to dusts and/or fibres (i.e. no versus any exposure) stratified by country, sex, age and industrial sector or occupation. For Systematic Review 2, we will include randomized controlled trials, cohort studies, case-control studies and other non-randomized intervention studies with an estimate of any occupational exposure to dusts and/or fibres on the prevalence of, incidence of or mortality due to pneumoconiosis, compared with the theoretical minimum risk exposure level of no exposure. STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS: At least two review authors will independently screen titles and abstracts against the eligibility criteria at a first stage and full texts of potentially eligible records at a second stage, followed by extraction of data from qualifying studies. At least two review authors will assess risk of bias and the quality of evidence, using the most suited tools currently available. For Systematic Review 2, if feasible, we will combine relative risks using meta-analysis. We will report results using the guidelines for accurate and transparent health estimates reporting (GATHER) for Systematic Review 1 and the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines (PRISMA) for Systematic Review 2. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018084131.

Strengthening Human Immunodeficiency Virus and Tuberculosis Prevention Capacity among South African Healthcare Workers: A Mixed Methods Study of a Collaborative Occupational Health Program.

BACKGROUND: Insufficient training in infection control and occupational health among healthcare workers (HCWs) in countries with high human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and tuberculosis (TB) burdens requires attention. We examined the effectiveness of a 1-year Certificate Program in Occupational Health and Infection Control conducted in Free State Province, South Africa in an international partnership to empower HCWs to become change agents to promote workplace-based HIV and TB prevention. METHODS: Questionnaires assessing reactions to the program and Knowledge, Attitudes, Skills, and Practices were collected pre-, mid-, and postprogram. Individual interviews, group project evaluations, and participant observation were also conducted. Quantitative data were analyzed using Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Qualitative data were thematically coded and analyzed using the Kirkpatrick framework. RESULTS: Participants recruited (n = 32) were mostly female (81%) and nurses (56%). Pre-to-post-program mean scores improved in knowledge (+12%, p = 0.002) and skills/practices (+14%, p = 0.002). Pre-program attitude scores were high but did not change. Participants felt empowered and demonstrated attitudinal improvements regarding HIV, TB, infection control, and occupational health. Successful projects were indeed implemented. However, participants encountered considerable difficulties in trying to sustain improvement, due largely to lack of pre-existing knowledge and experience, combined with inadequate staffing and insufficient management support. CONCLUSION: Training is essential to strengthen HCWs' occupational health and infection control knowledge, attitudes, skills, and practices, and workplace-based training programs such as this can yield impressive results. However, the considerable mentorship resources required for such programs and the substantial infrastructural supports needed for implementation and sustainability of improvements in settings without pre-existing experience in such endeavors should not be underestimated.