Occupational Exposure to Solar Radiation and the Eye: A Call to Implement Health Surveillance of Outdoor Workers.

Globally, hundreds of millions of outdoor workers are exposed to solar radiation (SR) for the majority of their working life. Such occupational exposure is known to induce various adverse health effects to the eyes, mainly related to its ultraviolet (UV) component. The present work is a call-to-action aimed at raising the awareness on the need of health surveillance for the prevention of the chronic ocular diseases in outdoor workers. Photo-chemical chronic damage can induce pterygium at the outer layer of the eye and cataract in the lens. Considering carcinogenic effects, rare squamous-cells tumors of the cornea and/or of the conjunctiva and the ocular melanomas are associated with UV radiation exposure. Solar UV-related eye diseases should be considered as "occupational diseases" when there is sufficient exposure in workers, but they are often not recognized, and/or frequently not reported to the national compensation authorities. Therefore, to prevent the burden of these work-related eye pathologies, an adequate risk assessment with identification of appropriate preventive measures, and a provision of periodic health surveillance to the exposed workers, in particular considering those at higher risk of exposure or with individual susceptibility, should be urgently implemented.

Protocol for a Systematic Review on the Effectiveness of Interventions to Reduce Exposure to Occupational Solar UltraViolet Radiation (UVR) Among Outdoor Workers.

Background: Solar UltraViolet Radiation (UVR) is considered the most relevant occupational carcinogenic exposure in terms of the number of workers exposed (i.e., outdoor workers) and UVR-induced skin cancers are among the most frequent types of occupational cancers worldwide. This review aims to collect and evaluate all the available preventive interventions conducted on outdoor workers to reduce their solar UVR related risk, with the final purpose of reducing the burden of occupational skin cancers for outdoor workers. Methods: We will search the following databases for peer-reviewed original research published: MEDLINE (through PubMed), Scopus, and EMBASE. We will include only interventional studies, both randomized and non-randomized, with an adequate comparison group, therefore excluding cross-sectional studies, as well as case-reports/series, reviews, and letters/comments. The systematic review will adhere to the "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses" (PRISMA) guidelines for reporting systematic reviews. After the literature search, studies to be included will be independently reviewed by two Authors, first based on title and abstract, then based on the full text, according to the inclusion criteria. Conflicts will be solved by a third Author. Two authors will independently extract the required data from included studies and perform quality assessment according to the relevant domain for Risk of Bias assessment proposed by the Cochrane collaboration group. In case of sufficient homogeneity of interventions and outcomes evaluated, results from subgroups of studies will be pooled together in a meta-analysis. Discussion: Following the principles for the evaluation of interventions for cancer prevention established by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, this systematic review will investigate the effectiveness of the interventions, and consequently it will provide reliable indications for the actual reduction of skin cancer incidence in outdoor workers.

Risk of cataract in health care workers exposed to ionizing radiation: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The eye is an important sensory organ occupationally exposed to ionizing radiation (IR) in healthcare workers (HCWs) engaged in medical imaging (MI). New evidence highlights the possible induction of cataract at IR exposure levels to be much lower than expected in the past. OBJECTIVE: Conduct an updated review on the current evidence on cataract risk in healthcare workers exposed to IR. METHODS: Published scientific studies on cataract risk in IR exposed healthcare workers were collected through a systematic search of two biomedical databases (MEDLINE and Scopus). Data from included studies was extracted and summarized. Study quality was also assessed. RESULTS: All 21 eligible studies reported an increased prevalence of cataract, especially posterior subcapsular cataract, in IR exposed  HCWs with a higher prevalence in interventional cardiology staff. DISCUSSION: Our review synthesizes the latest evidence to support the hypothesis of a significantly increased risk of occupational cataract in healthcare workers operating MI and exposed to IR, especially in interventional cardiologists. Data also support a dose-response relationship between IR exposure and the prevalence of opacities, especially posterior subcapsular opacities. CONCLUSIONS: Findings highlight the need for effective control measures including appropriate training, adherence to protective procedures, and a constant use of shields and eye personal protective equipment in healthcare workers with optical exposure to IR. Periodic health surveillance programs, possibly including lens evaluation, are also important to monitor cataract risk in these MI operators.

WHO/ILO work-related burden of disease and injury: Protocol for systematic reviews of occupational exposure to solar ultraviolet radiation and of the effect of occupational exposure to solar ultraviolet radiation on cataract.

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. Here, we present the protocol for two systematic reviews of parameters for estimating the number of disability-adjusted life years of cataracts from occupational exposure to solar ultraviolet radiation, to inform the development of the WHO/ILO joint methodology. OBJECTIVES: We aim to systematically review studies on occupational exposure to solar ultraviolet radiation (Systematic Review 1) and systematically review and meta-analyse estimates of the effect of occupational exposure to solar ultraviolet radiation on the development of cataract (Systematic Review 2), applying the Navigation Guide systematic review methodology as an organizing framework and conducting both systematic reviews in tandem and in a harmonized way. 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 Ovid Medline, PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Sciences. 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) workers in WHO and/or ILO Member States, but exclude children (<15 years) and unpaid domestic workers. For Systematic Review 1, we will include quantitative studies on the prevalence of relevant levels of occupational exposure to solar ultraviolet radiation and of the total working time spent outdoors from 1960 to 2018, stratified by sex, age, country 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 the effect of any occupational exposure to solar ultraviolet radiation (i.e. ≥30 Jm-2/day of occupational solar UV exposure at the surface of the eye) on the prevalence or incidence of cataract, compared with the theoretical minimum risk exposure level (i.e. <30 Jm-2/day of occupational solar UV exposure at the surface of the eye). 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: CRD42018098897.