How to Define the Content of a Job-Specific Worker's Health Surveillance for Hospital Physicians?

BACKGROUND: A job-specific Worker's Health Surveillance (WHS) for hospital physicians is a preventive occupational health strategy aiming at early detection of their diminished work-related health in order to improve or maintain physician's health and quality of care. This study addresses what steps should be taken to determine the content of a job-specific WHS for hospital physicians and outlines that content. METHODS: Based on four questions, decision trees were developed for physical and psychological job demands and for biological, chemical, and physical exposures to decide whether or not to include work-related health effects related to occupational exposures or aspects of health reflecting insufficient job requirements. Information was gathered locally through self-reporting and systematic observations at the workplace and from evidence in international publications. RESULTS: Information from the decision trees on the prevalence and impact of the health- or work-functioning effect led to inclusion of occupational exposures (e.g., biological agents, emotionally demanding situations), job requirements (e.g., sufficient vision, judging ability), or health effects (e.g., depressive symptoms, neck complaints). Additionally, following the Dutch guideline for occupational physicians and based on specific job demands, screening for cardiovascular diseases, work ability, drug use, and alcohol consumption was included. Targeted interventions were selected when a health or work functioning problem existed and were chosen based on evidence for effectiveness. CONCLUSION: The process of developing a job-specific WHS for hospital physicians was described and the content presented, which might serve as an example for other jobs. Before implementation, it must first be tested for feasibility and acceptability.

Exploring Study Designs for Evaluation of Interventions Aimed to Reduce Occupational Diseases and Injuries

Effective interventions to reduce work-related exposures are available for many types of work-related diseases or injuries. However, knowledge of the impact of these interventions on injury or disease outcomes is scarce due to practical and methodological reasons. Study designs are considered for the evaluation of occupational health interventions on occupational disease or injury. Latency and frequency of occurrence of the health outcomes are two important features when designing an evaluation study with occupational disease or occupational injury as an outcome measure. Controlled evaluation studies-giving strong indications for an intervention effect-seem more suitable for more frequently occurring injuries or diseases. Uncontrolled evaluation time or case series studies are an option for evaluating less frequently occurring injuries or diseases. Interrupted time series offer alternatives to experimental randomized controlled trials to give an insight into the effectiveness of preventive actions in the work setting to decision and policy makers.

Use of Ergonomic Measures Related to Musculoskeletal Complaints among Construction Workers: A 2-year Follow-up Study

BACKGROUND: The physical work demands of construction work can be reduced using ergonomic measures. The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of ergonomic measures related to musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) among construction workers. METHODS: A questionnaire was sent at baseline and 2 years later to 1,130 construction workers. We established (1) the proportion of workers reporting an increase in their use of ergonomic measures, (2) the proportion of workers reporting a decrease in MSDs, (3) the relative risk for an increase in the use of ergonomic measures and a decrease in MSDs, and (4) workers' knowledge and opinions about the use of ergonomic measures. RESULTS: At follow-up, response rate was 63% (713/1,130). The proportion of workers using ergonomic measures for vertical transport increased (34%, 144/419, p < 0.01); for measures regarding horizontal transport and the positioning of materials, no change was reported. The proportion of workers reporting shoulder complaints decreased (28%, 176/638, p = 0.02). A relationship between the use of ergonomic measures and MSDs was not found; 83% (581/704) of the workers indicated having sufficient knowledge about ergonomic measures. Lightening the physical load was reported to be the main reason for using them. CONCLUSION: Only the use of ergonomic measures for vertical transport increased over a 2-year period. No relationship between the use of ergonomic measures and MSDs was found. Strategies aimed at improving the availability of ergonomic equipment complemented with individualized advice and training in using them might be the required next steps to increase the use of ergonomic measures.

Developing a Best-Evidence Pre-employment Medical Examination: An Example from the Construction Industry

The Dutch construction industry has introduced a compulsory preemployment medical examination (PE-ME). Best-evidence contents related to specific job demands are, however, lacking and need to be gathered. After the identification of job demands and health problems in the construction industry (systematic literature search and expert meeting), specific job demands and related requirements were defined and instruments proposed. Finally, a work ability assessment was linked to the instruments' outcomes, resulting in the modular character of the developed PE-ME. Twenty-two specific job demands for all Dutch construction jobs were identified, including kneeling/squatting, working under time pressure, and exposure to hazardous substances. The next step was proposing self-report questions, screening questionnaires, clinical tests, and/or performance-based tests, leading to a work ability judgment. "Lifting/carrying" is described as an example. The new modular PE-ME enables a job-specific assessment of work ability to be made for more than 100 jobs in the Dutch construction industry.

Return to Work after an Acute Coronary Syndrome: Patients' Perspective

OBJECTIVES: To describe the time perspective of return to work and the factors that facilitate and hinder return to work in a group of survivors of acute coronary syndrome (ACS). METHODS: Retrospective semi-structured telephone survey 2 to 3 years after hospitalization with 84 employed Dutch ACS-patients from one academic medical hospital. RESULTS: Fifty-eight percent of patients returned to work within 3 months, whereas at least 88% returned to work once within 2 years. Two years after hospitalization, 12% of ACS patients had not returned to work at all, and 24% were working, but not at pre-ACS levels. For all ACS-patients, the most mentioned categories of facilitating factors to return to work were having no complaints and not having signs or symptoms of heart disease. Physical incapacity, co-morbidity, and mental incapacity were the top 3 categories of hindering factors against returning to work. CONCLUSION: Within 2 years, 36% of the patients had not returned to work at their pre-ACS levels. Disease factors, functional capacity, environmental factors, and personal factors were listed as affecting subjects' work ability level.