Search

Objective The main aim of this study was to explore any association between colorectal cancer (CRC) and rotating shift work in nurses and midwives. The secondary aim of this study was to identify risk factors for CRC in nurses and midwives who are rotating shift workers. Design Cross-sectional study. Setting Electronic survey of participants from Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom. Subjects A sample of 8,199 male and female nurses and midwives from Australia, New Zealand and the United Kingdom invited through their registration papers or newsletter advertisement. Main outcome measure Prevalence of CRC in participants who have worked rotating shifts for 1-14 years or ≥15 years compared to participants who have never worked rotating shifts. In addition, risk factors for CRC in the rotating shift work population were analysed in a multivariate logistic regression model in order to obtain odds ratio of CRC. Results No statistically significant difference was found in the prevalence of CRC between those who have never worked rotating shift work, worked 1-14 years and worked 15 or more years. Among rotating shift workers, diabetes was associated with a 123-fold (95% CI 39-392; p<0.001) increased odds of CRC, while Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD) was associated with a 190-fold (95%CI 68-526; p<0.001) increased odds of CRC. Screening colonoscopy or sigmoidoscopy for CRC was associated with a 10-fold (95% CI 3-35; p<0.001) increased odds of being diagnosed with CRC. Conclusion No significant association was found between rotating shift work and colorectal cancer in nurses and midwives. In nurses and midwives who are rotating shift workers, diabetes, IBD and CRC screening significantly increased the odds of CRC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Lone parents and their children experience higher than average levels of adverse health and social outcomes, much of which are explained by high rates of poverty. Many high income countries have attempted to address high poverty rates by introducing employment requirements for lone parents in receipt of welfare benefits. However, there is evidence that employment may not reduce poverty or improve the health of lone parents and their children.Methods: We conducted a systematic review of qualitative studies reporting lone parents' accounts of participation in welfare to work (WtW), to identify explanations and possible mechanisms for the impacts of WtW on health and wellbeing. Twenty one bibliographic databases were searched. Two reviewers independently screened references and assessed study quality. Studies from any high income country that met the criteria of focussing on lone parents, mandatory WtW interventions, and health or wellbeing were included. Thematic synthesis was used to investigate analytic themes between studies.Results: Screening of the 4703 identified papers and quality assessment resulted in the inclusion of 16 qualitative studies of WtW in five high income countries, USA, Canada, UK, Australia, and New Zealand, covering a variety of welfare regimes. Our synthesis found that WtW requirements often conflicted with child care responsibilities. Available employment was often poorly paid and precarious. Adverse health impacts, such as increased stress, fatigue, and depression were commonly reported, though employment and appropriate training was linked to increased self-worth for some. WtW appeared to influence health through the pathways of conflict and control, analytical themes which emerged during synthesis. WtW reduced control over the nature of employment and care of children. Access to social support allowed some lone parents to manage the conflict associated with employment, and to increase control over their circumstances, with potentially beneficial health impacts.Conclusion: WtW can result in increased conflict and reduced control, which may lead to negative impacts on mental health. Availability of social support may mediate the negative health impacts of WtW. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective This paper examines how negative experiences with the health-care system create a lack of confidence in receiving medical care in seven countries: Australia, Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, the United Kingdom, and the United States. Methods The empirical analysis is based on data from the Commonwealth Fund International Health Policy Survey 2007, with nationally representative samples of adults aged 18 and over. For the analysis of the experience of cost barriers and confidence in receiving medical care, we conducted pairwise comparisons of group percentages as well as country-wise multivariate logistic regression models. Results Individuals who have experienced cost barriers show a significantly lower level of confidence in receiving safe and quality medical care than those who have not. This effect is most pronounced in the United States, where people who have foregone necessary treatment because of costs are four times as likely to lack confidence as individuals without the experience of cost barriers (adjusted odds ratio 4.00). In New Zealand, Germany, and Canada, individuals with the experience of cost barriers are twice as likely to report low confidence compared with those without this experience (adjusted odds ratios of 1.95, 2.19 and 2.24, respectively). In the Netherlands and UK, cost barriers are only a marginal phenomenon. Conclusions The fact that the experience of financial barriers considerably lowers confidence indicates that financial incentives, such as private co-payments, have a negative effect on overall public support and therefore on the legitimacy of health-care systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]