Prevalence of Disability by Occupation Group - United States, 2016-2020.

In 2020, approximately 21.5 million employed U.S. adults aged 18-64 years had some form of disability. Although 75.8% of noninstitutionalized persons without disability aged 18-64 were employed, only 38.4% of their counterparts with disability were employed (1). Persons with disability have job preferences similar to persons without disability but might encounter barriers (e.g., lower average training or education levels, discrimination, or limited transportation options) that affect the types of jobs they hold (2,3). CDC analyzed 2016-2020 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) data from 35 states and Guam to estimate disability prevalences, by type and occupation group, among currently employed U.S. adults aged 18-64 years. The highest adjusted disability prevalences were among workers in three of the 22 major occupation groups: food preparation and serving-related (19.9%); personal care and service (19.4%); and arts, design, entertainment, sports, and media (17.7%). Occupation groups with the lowest adjusted disability prevalences were business and financial operations (11.3%), health care practitioners and technicians (11.1%), and architecture and engineering (11.0%). The distributions of persons with and without disability differ across occupations. Workplace programs that address the training, education, and workplace needs of employees with disability might improve workers' ability to enter, thrive in, and advance in a wider range of occupations.

Novel Automation of an Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Spot Assay Testing Method: Comparable Diagnostic Performance of the T-SPOT.TB Test Using Manual Density Gradient Cell Isolation versus Automated Positive Selection with the T-Cell Select Kit.

The diagnosis of latent tuberculosis (TB) infection (LTBI) is critical to improve TB treatment and control, and the T-SPOT.TB test is a commercial enzyme-linked immunosorbent spot assay used for this purpose. The objective of the study was to increase automation and extend the time between blood collection and processing for the T-SPOT.TB test from 0 to 8 h to 0 to 54 h. The previous maximum time between blood collection and processing for the T-SPOT.TB test is 32 h using T-Cell Xtend. For this, we compared the T-SPOT.TB test using manual peripheral blood mononuclear cell (PBMC) isolation by density gradient separation at 0 to 8 h (reference method, control arm) to an automated PBMC isolation method using magnetic beads (T-Cell Select kit) at 0 to 55 h postcollection. A total of 620 subjects were enrolled from 4 study sites, and blood samples were collected from each volunteer, comprising 1,850 paired samples in total. Overall agreement between both methods was 96.8% (confidence interval [CI], 95.9 to 97.6%), with 95.8% (CI, 93.5 to 97.5%) positive and 97.1% negative agreement (CI, 96.1 to 97.9%). In summary, there was a strong overall agreement between the automated and manual T-SPOT.TB test processing methods. The results suggest that the T-SPOT.TB test can be processed using automated positive selection with magnetic beads using T-Cell Select to decrease hands-on time. Also, this cell isolation method allowed for the time between blood collection and processing to range from 0 to 55 h. Additional studies in larger and diverse patient populations including immunocompromised and pediatric patients are needed.