A Novel Application of Risk-Risk Tradeoffs in Occupational Health: Nurses' Occupational Asthma and Infection Risk Perceptions Related to Cleaning and Disinfection during COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Nurses face the risk of new onset occupational asthma (OA) due to exposures to cleaning and disinfection (C&D) agents used to prevent infections in healthcare facilities. The objective of this study was to measure nurses' preferences when presented with simultaneous OA and respiratory viral infection (e.g., COVID-19) risks related to increased/decreased C&D activities. METHODS: Nurses working in healthcare for ≥1 year and without physician-diagnosed asthma were recruited for an online anonymous survey, including four risk-risk tradeoff scenarios between OA and respiratory infection with subsequent recovery (Infect and Recovery) or subsequent death (Infect and Death). Nurses were presented with baseline risks at hypothetical "Hospital 1", and were asked to choose Hospital 2 (increased OA risk to maintain infection risk), Hospital 3 (increased infection risk to maintain OA risk), or indicate that they were equally happy. RESULTS: Over 70% of nurses were willing to increase infection risk to maintain baseline OA risk if they were confident they would recover from the infection. However, even when the risk of infection leading to death was much lower than OA, most nurses were not willing to accept a larger (but still small) risk of death to avoid doubling their OA risk. Age, work experience, and ever having contracted or knowing anyone who has contracted a respiratory viral infection at work influenced choices. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate the novel application of a risk-risk tradeoff framework to address an occupational health issue. However, more data are needed to test the generalizability of the risk preferences found in this specific risk-risk tradeoff context.

Thinking on your feet: Beauty and auto small businesses maneuver the risks of the COVID-19 pandemic.

On March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization officially declared SARS-CoV-2 a pandemic, and governments and health institutions enacted various public health measures to decrease its transmission rate. The COVID-19 pandemic made occupational health disparities for small businesses more visible and created an unprecedented financial burden, particularly for those located in communities of color. In part, communities of color experienced disproportionate mortality and morbidity rates from COVID-19 due to their increased exposure. The COVID-19 pandemic has prompted the public to reflect on risks daily. Risk perception is a critical factor influencing how risk gets communicated and perceived by individuals, groups, and communities. This study explores competing risk perceptions regarding COVID-19, economic impacts, vaccination, and disinfectant exposures of workers at beauty salons and auto shops in Tucson, Arizona, using a perceived risk score measured on a scale of 1-10, with higher scores indicating more perceived risk. The primary differences between respondents at beauty salons and auto shops regarding their perceived risks of COVID-19 vaccination were between the vaccinated and unvaccinated. For every group except the unvaccinated, the perceived risk score of getting the COVID-19 vaccine was low, and the score of not getting the COVID-19 vaccine was high. Study participants in different demographic groups ranked economic risk the highest compared to the other five categories: getting the COVID-19 vaccine, not getting the COVID-19 vaccine, COVID-19, disinfection, and general. A meaningful increase of four points in the perceived risk score of not getting the COVID-19 vaccine was associated with a 227% (95% CI: 27%, 740%) increase in the odds of being vaccinated. Analyzing these data collected during the coronavirus pandemic may provide insight into how to promote the health-protective behavior of high-risk workers and employers in the service sector during times of new novel threats (such as a future pandemic or crisis) and how they process competing risks.

Quantifying SARS-CoV-2 Infection Risk Within the Google/Apple Exposure Notification Framework to Inform Quarantine Recommendations.

Most early Bluetooth-based exposure notification apps use three binary classifications to recommend quarantine following SARS-CoV-2 exposure: a window of infectiousness in the transmitter, ≥15 minutes duration, and Bluetooth attenuation below a threshold. However, Bluetooth attenuation is not a reliable measure of distance, and infection risk is not a binary function of distance, nor duration, nor timing. We model uncertainty in the shape and orientation of an exhaled virus-containing plume and in inhalation parameters, and measure uncertainty in distance as a function of Bluetooth attenuation. We calculate expected dose by combining this with estimated infectiousness based on timing relative to symptom onset. We calibrate an exponential dose-response curve based on infection probabilities of household contacts. The probability of current or future infectiousness, conditioned on how long postexposure an exposed individual has been symptom-free, decreases during quarantine, with shape determined by incubation periods, proportion of asymptomatic cases, and asymptomatic shedding durations. It can be adjusted for negative test results using Bayes' theorem. We capture a 10-fold range of risk using six infectiousness values, 11-fold range using three Bluetooth attenuation bins, ∼sixfold range from exposure duration given the 30 minute duration cap imposed by the Google/Apple v1.1, and ∼11-fold between the beginning and end of 14 day quarantine. Public health authorities can either set a threshold on initial infection risk to determine 14-day quarantine onset, or on the conditional probability of current and future infectiousness conditions to determine both quarantine and duration.

Proposing a social ecological approach to address disparities in occupational exposures and health for low-wage and minority workers employed in small businesses.

Occupational disease and injuries are the 8th leading cause of death in the United States. Low-wage and minority workers are more likely to work in hazardous industries and are thus at greater risk. Within the small business sector, in particular, the health of low-wage and minority workers is threatened by a multitude of complex and interrelated factors that increase their risk for injuries, death, and even chronic disease. The COVID-19 pandemic has amplified these concerns, as many low-wage and minority workers are essential workers, and many small businesses are reopening with little to no guidance. The article describes work-related health risks and reviews current research on occupational and social ecological approaches to improving the health of minority and low-wage workers primarily employed by small businesses. We propose a conceptual framework that integrates the social ecological model with the hierarchy of controls to address work-related health among low-wage and minority workers specifically in the small business sector. Community-based strategies are recommended to engage small business owners and workers in efforts to address their immediate needs, while building towards sustainable policy change over time. These strategies are of particular importance as small businesses reopen in the ongoing pandemic.

Another invisible enemy indoors: COVID-19, human health, the home, and United States indoor air policy.

After the emergence of the respiratory virus SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19), many exposure and environmental health scientists promptly recognized the potentially catastrophic public health ramifications of concurrent infectious and air pollution-mediated disease. Nevertheless, much of this attention has been focused on outdoor interactions. Each year, 3.8 million people worldwide prematurely die from illnesses attributable to indoor air. Hence, poor household indoor air quality is a long-standing public health issue with even greater relevance now that many individuals are spending more time at home. At present, the Environmental Protection Agency does not regulate indoor air, and state-level legislation has resulted in a patchwork of national coverage. Here, we describe common sources of indoor air pollution, the health impacts of indoor pollutants, and populations disparately impacted by COVID-19 and poor indoor air quality. Furthermore, we detail the need for better legislation that promotes the integrity of the indoor air environment, and what individuals can do to personally protect themselves as we await more comprehensive indoor air legislation.