Search

The true burden (morbidity, mortality, disability, cost, pain, distress) of occupational and work-related diseases and injuries is unknown, and what is reported as burden is significantly underestimated. This underestimation affects the way decision-makers view investments in research and worker protection, which in turn has a substantial impact on national welfare and public health. To better describe the societal and individual burdens of occupational and work-related diseases and injuries, we propose an approach to gauge what is known about burden and where new assessments may be made. This approach consists of 4 elements to consider in burden assessments: (1) utilizing multiple domains, including the individual worker, the worker’s family, the community in which the workplace is located, the employer, and society as a whole; (2) taking a broader view of the work-relatedness of disease and injury; (3) assessing the impact of the entire working-life continuum; and (4) applying the comprehensive concept of “well-being” as an indicator in addressing contemporary changes in the nature of work, the workplace, and the workforce. Further research on burden and enhanced surveillance is needed to develop these elements.

Action to address workforce functioning and productivity requires a broader approach than the traditional scope of occupational safety and health. Focus on “well-being” may be one way to develop a more encompassing objective. Well-being is widely cited in public policy pronouncements, but often as “. . . and well-being” (e.g., health and well-being). It is generally not defined in policy and rarely operationalized for functional use. Many definitions of well-being exist in the occupational realm. Generally, it is a synonym for health and a summative term to describe a flourishing worker who benefits from a safe, supportive workplace, engages in satisfying work, and enjoys a fulfilling work life. We identified issues for considering well-being in public policy related to workers and the workplace.

There is increasing evidence that obesity and overweight may be related, in part, to adverse work conditions. In particular, the risk of obesity may increase in high-demand, low-control work environments, and for those who work long hours. In addition, obesity may modify the risk for vibration-induced injury and certain occupational musculoskeletal disorders. We hypothesized that obesity may also be a co–risk factor for the development of occupational asthma and cardiovascular disease that and it may modify the worker’s response to occupational stress, immune response to chemical exposures, and risk of disease from occupational neurotoxins. We developed 5 conceptual models of the interrelationship of work, obesity, and occupational safety and health and highlighted the ethical, legal, and social issues related to fuller consideration of obesity’s role in occupational health and safety.

OBJECTIVES: To identify potential occupational risk factors, this study examined the occupational occurrence of various neurodegenerative diseases. METHODS: Death certificates from 27 states in the National Occupational Mortality Surveillance System were evaluated for 1982 to 1991. Proportionate mortality ratios were calculated by occupation for presenile dementia, Alzheimer's disease, Parkinson's disease, and motor neuron disease. RESULTS: Excess mortality was observed for all four categories in the following occupational categories: teachers; medical personnel; machinists and machine operators; scientists; writers/designers/entertainers; and support and clerical workers. Clusters of three neurodegenerative diseases were also found in occupations involving pesticides, solvents, and electromagnetic fields and in legal, library, social, and religious work. Early death from motor neuron disease was found for firefighters, janitors, military personnel, teachers, excavation machine operators, and veterinarians, among others. CONCLUSIONS: Neurodegenerative disease occurs more frequently in some occupations than in others, and this distribution, which may indicate occupational risk factors, should be further investigated.

Most diseases, injuries, and other health conditions experienced by working people are multifactorial, especially as the workforce ages. Evidence supporting the role of work and personal risk factors in the health of working people is frequently underused in developing interventions. Achieving a longer, healthy working life requires a comprehensive preventive approach. To help develop such an approach, we evaluated the influence of both occupational and personal risk factors on workforce health. We present 32 examples illustrating 4 combinatorial models of occupational hazards and personal risk factors (genetics, age, gender, chronic disease, obesity, smoking, alcohol use, prescription drug use). Models that address occupational and personal risk factors and their interactions can improve our understanding of health hazards and guide research and interventions.

OBJECTIVES: This study examined tuberculosis skin test conversions among 24,487 New York State prison employees in 1992. METHODS: Conversions were analyzed by prison and by job category. RESULTS: The conversion rate was 1.9%. Employees in prisons with low and high numbers of prisoner cases had odds ratios for conversion of 1.67 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.27, 2.19) and 2.20 (95% CI = 1.69, 2.87), respectively, relative to employees in prisons with no prisoner cases. In prisons with cases, guards and medical personnel had odds ratios of 1.64 (95% CI = 1.11, 2.43) and 2.39 (95% CI = 1.40, 4.08), respectively, relative to employees with little prisoner contact. CONCLUSIONS: In 1992, approximately one third of new infections among New York State prison employees were due to occupational exposure.

During the last two decades, an increasing number of epidemiologic studies have found cohorts of workers to be at high risk of work-related chronic diseases, especially cancers. These studies frequently have led to the broad recognition of occupational hazards and eventually to the prevention of exposures to such hazards. Generally, however, the individual cohort members found to be at high risk have not been notified of study results, and programs of medical intervention or of palliative services directed at these individual workers have not been developed. Recently, the issue of whether or not workers have a right to be notified more directly about known health hazards to which they may have been exposed has emerged as a major, unresolved question in public health policy. Issues of concern include the criteria that should guide notifications; whom, when, and how to notify; and who should pay for notification and follow-up services. This commentary discusses the scientific, ethical, economic, and institutional aspects of worker notification, and describes three new demonstration projects that have provided notification and intervention for workers at high risk of bladder, colon, and lung cancer.An emerging issue in public health policy is the right of workers to be notified if they are at high risk for occupational diseases. This commentary describes demonstration projects for notification and intervention in three cohorts at high risk for specific cancers. On the basis of these projects the authors formulate criteria for the development of a successful notification program. They also consider the broader issues of financial responsibility and support, psychological and socioeconomic impact on the worker at risk, and the fundamental question of entitlement to disclosure.