Search

OBJECTIVE: Within the scope of the Exposome Project for Health and Occupational Research on applying the exposome concept to working life health, we aimed to provide a broad overview of the status of knowledge on occupational exposures and associated health effects across multiple noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) to help inform research priorities.METHODS: We conducted a narrative review of occupational risk factors that can be considered to have "consistent evidence for an association," or where there is "limited/inadequate evidence for an association" for 6 NCD groups: nonmalignant respiratory diseases; neurodegenerative diseases; cardiovascular/metabolic diseases; mental disorders; musculoskeletal diseases; and cancer. The assessment was done in expert sessions, primarily based on systematic reviews, supplemented with narrative reviews, reports, and original studies. Subsequently, knowledge gaps were identified, e.g. based on missing information on exposure-response relationships, gender differences, critical time-windows, interactions, and inadequate study quality.RESULTS: We identified over 200 occupational exposures with consistent or limited/inadequate evidence for associations with one or more of 60+ NCDs. Various exposures were identified as possible risk factors for multiple outcomes. Examples are diesel engine exhaust and cadmium, with consistent evidence for lung cancer, but limited/inadequate evidence for other cancer sites, respiratory, neurodegenerative, and cardiovascular diseases. Other examples are physically heavy work, shift work, and decision latitude/job control. For associations with limited/inadequate evidence, new studies are needed to confirm the association. For risk factors with consistent evidence, improvements in study design, exposure assessment, and case definition could lead to a better understanding of the association and help inform health-based threshold levels.CONCLUSIONS: By providing an overview of knowle

Despite evidence for the effectiveness of policies that target obesogenic environments, their adoption remains deficient. Using methods and concepts from complexity and political science (Stock-and-Flow analysis and Punctuated Equilibrium Theory) and a qualitative literature review, we developed system maps to identify feedback loops that hinder policymaking on mitigating obesogenic environments and feedback loops that could trigger and sustain policy change. We found numerous self-reinforcing feedback loops that buttress the assumption that obesity is an individual problem, strengthening the biomedical and commercial weight-loss sectors' claim to “ownership” over solutions. That is, improvements in therapies for individuals with obesity reinforces policymakers' reluctance to target obesogenic environments. Random events that focus attention on obesity (e.g., celebrities dismissing soda) could disrupt this cycle, when actors from outside the medical and weight-loss sector (e.g., anti-weight stigma activists) successfully reframe obesity as a societal problem, which requires robust and politically relevant engagement with affected communities prior to such events taking place. Sustained prioritization of policies targeting obesogenic environments requires shared problem ownership of affected communities and nonhealth government sectors, by emphasizing cobenefits of policies that target obesogenic environments (e.g., ultraprocessed food taxation for raising revenue) and solutions that are meaningful for affected communities.

Despite evidence for the effectiveness of policies that target obesogenic environments, their adoption remains deficient. Using methods and concepts from complexity and political science (Stock-and-Flow analysis and Punctuated Equilibrium Theory) and a qualitative literature review, we developed system maps to identify feedback loops that hinder policymaking on mitigating obesogenic environments and feedback loops that could trigger and sustain policy change. We found numerous self-reinforcing feedback loops that buttress the assumption that obesity is an individual problem, strengthening the biomedical and commercial weight-loss sectors' claim to “ownership” over solutions. That is, improvements in therapies for individuals with obesity reinforces policymakers' reluctance to target obesogenic environments. Random events that focus attention on obesity (e.g., celebrities dismissing soda) could disrupt this cycle, when actors from outside the medical and weight-loss sector (e.g., anti-weight stigma activists) successfully reframe obesity as a societal problem, which requires robust and politically relevant engagement with affected communities prior to such events taking place. Sustained prioritization of policies targeting obesogenic environments requires shared problem ownership of affected communities and nonhealth government sectors, by emphasizing cobenefits of policies that target obesogenic environments (e.g., ultraprocessed food taxation for raising revenue) and solutions that are meaningful for affected communities.

OBJECTIVES: This study investigates the associations between the Danish version of a job exposure matrix for COVID-19 (COVID-19-JEM) and Danish register-based SARS-CoV-2 infection information across three waves of the pandemic. The COVID-19-JEM consists of four dimensions on transmission: two on mitigation measures, and two on precarious work characteristics.METHODS: The study comprised 2 021 309 persons from the Danish working population between 26 February 2020 and 15 December 2021. Logistic regression models were applied to assess the associations between the JEM dimensions and overall score and SARS-CoV-2 infection across three infection waves, with peaks in March-April 2020, December-January 2021, and February-March 2022. Sex, age, household income, country of birth, wave, residential region and during wave 3 vaccination status were accounted for.RESULTS: Higher risk scores within the transmission and mitigation dimensions and the overall JEM score resulted in higher odds ratios (OR) of a SARS-CoV-2 infection. OR attenuated across the three waves with ranges of 1.08-5.09 in wave 1, 1.06-1.60 in wave 2, and 1.05-1.45 in those not (fully) vaccinated in wave 3. In wave 3, no associations were found for those fully vaccinated. In all waves, the two precarious work dimensions showed weaker or inversed associations.CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19-JEM is a promising tool for assessing occupational exposure to SARS-CoV-2 and other airborne infectious agents that mainly spread between people who are in close contact with each other. However, its usefulness depends on applied restrictions and the vaccination status in the population of interest.

Objectives This study aims to investigate across subgroups of healthcare workers (1) the changes in psychosocial working conditions and emotional exhaustion during the pandemic compared with the situation before, and (2) the impact of different stages of the COVID-19 pandemic in terms of hospital pressure on psychosocial working conditions and emotional exhaustion. Methods Five questionnaire measurements during 2 years from 1915 healthcare workers in the longitudinal study € the Netherlands Working Conditions Survey-COVID-19' were used. At each measurement, three subgroups were defined: working with patients with COVID-19, working with other patients and not working with patients. For each measurement, hospital pressure was determined by number of hospitalisations per day. Linear mixed models were fitted to analyse differences across subgroups of healthcare workers. Results During COVID-19, psychosocial working conditions deteriorated among healthcare workers working with patients, in particular with patients with COVID-19, compared with healthcare workers not working with patients after correcting for the situation before COVID-19. No changes were observed for emotional exhaustion in any of the subgroups. An increasing hospital pressure improved job autonomy and reduced emotional demands among healthcare workers in COVID-19 wards, but had no influence on other psychosocial working conditions and emotional exhaustion. Conclusion Psychosocial working conditions deteriorated for healthcare workers working with (COVID-19) patients during the pandemic, while emotional exhaustion did not change among all groups of healthcare workers.

Objective This study aimed to construct a job exposure matrix (JEM) for risk of becoming infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus in an occupational setting. Methods Experts in occupational epidemiology from three European countries (Denmark, The Netherlands and the United Kingdom) defined the relevant exposure and workplace characteristics with regard to possible exposure to the SARS-CoV-2 virus. In an iterative process, experts rated the different dimensions of the COVID-19-JEM for each job title within the International Standard Classification of Occupations system 2008 (ISCO-08). Agreement scores, weighted kappas, and variances were estimated. Results The COVID-19-JEM contains four determinants of transmission risk [number of people, nature of contacts, contaminated workspaces and location (indoors or outdoors)], two mitigation measures (social distancing and face covering), and two factors for precarious work (income insecurity and proportion of migrants). Agreement scores ranged from 0.27 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.25-0.29] for 'migrants' to 0.76 (95% CI 0.74-0.78) for 'nature of contacts'. Weighted kappas indicated moderate-to-good agreement for all dimensions [ranging from 0.60 (95% CI 0.60-0.60) for 'face covering' to 0.80 (95% CI 0.80-0.80) for 'contaminated workspaces'], except for 'migrants' (0.14 (95% CI -0.07-0.36). As country differences remained after several consensus exercises, the COVID-19-JEM also has a country-axis. Conclusions The COVID-19-JEM assesses the risk at population level using eight dimensions related to SARS-COV-2 infections at work and will improve our ability to investigate work-related risk factors in epidemiological studies. The dimensions of the COVID-19-JEM could also be valuable for other future communicable diseases in the workplace.

Objectives This study aimed to evaluate the extent to which physical and mental health and body mass index (BMI) changed before, during and after becoming unemployed or employed, and whether these associations differ across psychosocial and physical working conditions. Methods Participants from seven waves (2010–2017) of the Dutch longitudinal Study on Transitions in Employment, Ability, and Motivation (STREAM) aged 45–64 years were included. STREAM provides information on physical and mental health, BMI and working conditions, and was enriched with monthly information on income components from Statistics Netherlands to define employment status during 2010–2017. Annual changes in physical and mental health (0–100 scales), and BMI (kg/m2) before, during and after becoming unemployed (N=13 279) and employed (N=1902) were estimated with generalized linear mixed-effect models. Results Before employed persons became unemployed they had poorer health than continuously employed persons, which worsened in the period before becoming unemployed. During the year of becoming unemployed, physical [b=1.45, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89–2.01] and mental health (b=1.46, 95% CI 0.85–2.07) improved, in particular among persons with unfavorable working conditions. After becoming unemployed physical health deteriorated (b=-0.52, 95% CI-0.80–-0.24) and BMI (b=0.11, 95% CI 0.03–0.19) increased, but mental health improved (b=0.33, 95% CI 0.02–0.63). Unemployed persons had better health before entering employment than continuously unemployed persons. The health of persons who entered employment did not statistically significantly change before or during the year of the transition. After entering employment, physical health deteriorated and BMI increased. Conclusions Maintaining a healthy workforce and limiting unfavorable working conditions may contribute to the prevention of unemployment and the promotion of re-integration.

Objective This study aimed to construct a job exposure matrix (JEM) for risk of becoming infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus in an occupational setting. Methods Experts in occupational epidemiology from three European countries (Denmark, The Netherlands and the United Kingdom) defined the relevant exposure and workplace characteristics with regard to possible exposure to the SARS-CoV-2 virus. In an iterative process, experts rated the different dimensions of the COVID19-JEM for each job title within the International Standard Classification of Occupations system 2008 (ISCO-08). Agreement scores, weighted kappas, and variances were estimated. Results The COVID-19-JEM contains four determinants of transmission risk [number of people, nature of contacts, contaminated workspaces and location (indoors or outdoors)], two mitigation measures (social distancing and face covering), and two factors for precarious work (income insecurity and proportion of migrants). Agreement scores ranged from 0.27 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.25–0.29] for ‘migrants’ to 0.76 (95% CI 0.74–0.78) for ‘nature of contacts’. Weighted kappas indicated moderate-to-good agreement for all dimensions [ranging from 0.60 (95% CI 0.60–0.60) for ‘face covering’ to 0.80 (95% CI 0.80–0.80) for ‘contaminated workspaces’], except for ‘migrants’ (0.14 (95% CI-0.07–0.36). As country differences remained after several consensus exercises, the COVID-19-JEM also has a country-axis. Conclusions The COVID-19-JEM assesses the risk at population level using eight dimensions related to SARSCOV-2 infections at work and will improve our ability to investigate work-related risk factors in epidemiological studies. The dimensions of the COVID-19-JEM could also be valuable for other future communicable diseases in the workplace.

Objectives The aim of the current study is to gain insight into the factors that benefit vitality and resilience of healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic, to develop and direct specific support strategies. Design, setting and participants This study applies a qualitative design, consisting of six focus groups and five interviews among 38 frontline healthcare workers in a large Dutch academic hospital. Included were professionals of the intensive care unit, COVID-19 departments, infection prevention units and facility management services. The study was conducted in October and November 2020, during the second wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Data analysis Thematic analysis was applied to focus group and interview data to gain insight into the factors that contribute to maintaining vitality and resilience, and to assess specific support needs. Results Data analysis of the focus groups and individual interviews resulted in a thematic map of the factors that contribute to maintaining resilience and vitality. The map stretches over two axes: one ranging from a healthy basis to adequate professional functioning and the other from individual to organisation, resulting in four quadrants: recharge and recover (healthy basis, individual), safety and connectedness at work (healthy basis, organisational), collaboration (professional functioning, organisational) and professional identity (professional functioning, individual). Conclusion Areas for organisational support strategies to increase vitality and resilience among healthcare professionals are: consistent communication, realistic job performance expectations, monitor and improve mental resilience, showing appreciation and act upon practical support requests.

BACKGROUND: This study developed prediction models for involuntary exit from paid employment through unemployment and disability benefits and examined if predictors and discriminative ability of these models differ between five common chronic diseases. METHODS: Data from workers in the Lifelines Cohort Study (n = 55 950) were enriched with monthly information on employment status from Statistics Netherlands. Potential predictors included sociodemographic factors, chronic diseases, unhealthy behaviours and working conditions. Data were analyzed using cause-specific Cox regression analyses. Models were evaluated with the C-index and the positive and negative predictive values (PPV and NPV, respectively). The developed models were externally validated using data from the Study on Transitions in Employment, Ability and Motivation. RESULTS: Being female, low education, depression, smoking, obesity, low development possibilities and low social support were predictors of unemployment and disability. Low meaning of work and low physical activity increased the risk for unemployment, while all chronic diseases increased the risk of disability benefits. The discriminative ability of the models of the development and validation cohort were low for unemployment (c = 0.62; c = 0.60) and disability benefits (c = 0.68; c = 0.75). After stratification for specific chronic diseases, the discriminative ability of models predicting disability benefits improved for cardiovascular disease (c = 0.81), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (c = 0.74) and diabetes mellitus type 2 (c = 0.74). The PPV was low while the NPV was high for all models. CONCLUSION: Taking workers' particular disease into account may contribute to an improved prediction of disability benefits, yet risk factors are better examined at the population level rather than at the individual level.

Background: Declines in employment protection may have disproportionate effects on employment opportunities of workers with low education and poorer health. This study investigates the impact of changes in employment protection levels on employment rates according to education and health in 23 European countries. Methods: Data were taken from the 4-year rotating panel European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions study. Employed participants aged 29–59 years (n = 334 999) were followed for 1 year over an 11-year period, from 2003 up to 2014. A logistic regression model with country and period fixed effects was used to estimate the association between changes in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) employment protection index and labour market outcomes, incorporating interaction terms with education and health. Results: 15 of the 23 countries saw their level of employment protection decline between 2003 and 2014. Reduced employment protection of temporary workers increased odds of early retirement (OR 6.29, 95% CI 3.17 to 12.48) and unemployment (OR 1.37, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.76). Reduced employment protection of permanent workers increased odds of early retirement more among workers in poor health (OR 4.46, 95% CI 2.26 to 8.78) than among workers in good health (OR 2.58, 95% CI 1.30 to 5.10). The impact of reduced employment protection of temporary workers on unemployment was stronger among lower-educated workers (OR 1.47, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.90) than among higher-educated workers (OR 1.21, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.54). Conclusion: Reduced employment protection increased the odds of early exit from paid employment, especially among workers with lower education and poorer health. Employment protection laws may help reduce the employment disadvantage of workers with low education and poorer health.