Associations of burnout with job demands/resources during the pandemic in health workers from Southeast European countries.

Introduction: Despite several studies assessing job demands and burnout in countries from the Southeast European (SEE) region, there is still a lack of data about the psychological impact of the pandemic on health workers (HWs). Aims: The present study aimed to demonstrate and compare levels of burnout dimensions in HWs from SEE countries and to reveal the burnout-job demands/resources relationships in these workers during the pandemic. Materials and methods: During the autumn of 2020, this online multicentric cross-sectional survey studied a large group (N = 4.621) of HWs working in SEE countries. The Maslach Burnout Inventory was used for the measurement of burnout dimensions. We analyzed the job demands by using the Hospital Experience Scale. Remuneration and relationships with superiors were measured using the Questionnaire sur les Ressources et Contraintes Professionnelles (English version). Results: A series of ANOVA comparisons of means revealed the countries in which respondents showed higher mean values of emotional exhaustion (Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, Moldova, Montenegro, and North Macedonia) and the countries in which respondents showed lower mean values of this burnout dimension (Israel and Romania) (Welch F = 17.98, p < 0.001). We also found differences among HWs from different countries in job demands and job resources. The testing of hierarchical regression models, which have been controlled for certain confounding factors, clearly revealed that emotional exhaustion was predicted by job demands (R2 = 0.37) and job resources (R2 = 0.16). Conclusion: Preventive measures for the improvement of mental health in HWs during the pandemic and beyond have to take into account the differences between countries regarding the country context and current scientific knowledge. A modified stress test should be implemented in hospitals regarding future shocks that might include new pandemics, terrorism, catastrophes, or border conflicts.

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.

Work ability of aging teachers in Bulgaria.

OBJECTIVES: The work ability of aging teachers is of special interest because of high risk of stress. The aim of the study was to follow the work ability of aging teachers and compare it with that of aging non-teacher professionals. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The study included 424 teachers of age ≤ 44 years old (N = 140) and ≥ 45 years old (N = 284), with about 10% male teachers in both age groups, matched by sex and age with non-teacher professionals. Work ability was assessed by means of the Work Ability Index (WAI). Chi2 tests and regression analyses were used for studying WAI scales ratings, diagnosed by physician diseases and WAI ratings. RESULTS: Our data shows comparatively high work ability for both age groups of teachers but WAI of aging teachers was significantly lower in comparison to their younger colleagues as well as aging non-teacher professionals. About 80% of aging groups reported diseases diagnosed by physicians. Cardiovascular, musculoskeletal and respiratory diseases were the most frequently reported by aging teachers, while teachers ≤ 44 years old reported respiratory, cardiovascular, neurological and sensory diseases. With aging significantly higher rates of arterial hypertension, diabetes, injury to hearing and mental disorders were reported by teachers as compared to aging non-teacher professionals. The rates of reported repeated infections of respiratory tracts were high in both age groups of teachers, especially in the group of aging teachers. The estimated work ability impairment due to the disease showed the significant effect of aging for teachers as well as the significant difference when comparing aging teachers and non-teacher professionals. CONCLUSIONS: Our data shows high work ability for both age groups of teachers but significantly lower for aging teachers accompanied with higher rates of psychosomatic diseases, including hearing impairment and respiratory diseases. Preservation of teacher health could contribute to maintenance of their work ability and retention in the labor market. Int J Occup Med Environ Health 2018;31(5):593-602.

Asbestos exposure and mesothelioma incidence and mortality in Bulgaria.

Bulgaria totally banned the import, production and use of asbestos in 2005, but produced and used asbestos products during the last 3-4 decades of the 20th century. The aim of this study was to follow the incidence and mortality of mesothelioma in Bulgaria in relation to past occupational exposures. A literature search between 1960 and 2014 was conducted to obtain information on asbestos consumption, occupational exposure and asbestos-related diseases (ARDs). Data on registered mesotheliomas were provided by the National Cancer Register and data for recognized occupational ARDs were provided by the National Social Security Institute. An increase in the incidence of mesothelioma from 5 to 58 from 1993 to 2013, with 666 cases in the 21-year period, was registered. Incidence, mortality rates, deaths and male-to-female ratios and were lower in comparison to industrialized countries. The increase in mesothelioma incidence is considered as a consequence of more recent production and use of asbestos and asbestos products and the high occupational exposure between 1977 and 1989, while the lower rate of mesothelioma deaths and male-to-female ratio need to be investigated further.