Industry-Specific Profile of COVID-19-Related Workers' Compensation Claims in New York State.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to characterize the distribution and award status of COVID-19-related workers' compensation (WC) claims in New York State (NYS) for 2020 and 2021. METHODS: Characteristics and filing rates of COVID-19 claims were described by industry, time of illness, and award status. Nursing care facilities' claims were compared with the recorded nursing home staff COVID-19 infections and deaths reported by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) during the same period. RESULTS: Of 29,814 COVID-19 claims, 21.9% were awarded benefits, although 86.8% of the claimants worked in essential industries. Of the 46,505 CMS-recorded COVID-19 infections, 1.4% resulted in a claim and 7.2% of the 111 CMS-recorded deaths received death benefits. CONCLUSIONS: The NYS WC program has provided very modest support to essential workers for the likely work-related burden of the pandemic in NYS.

Lack of access to personal protective equipment is associated with severe COVID-19 symptoms among in-person workers.

The use of personal protective equipment (PPE) at work can greatly reduce risk of SARS-CoV-2 transmission. However, it is unclear whether adequate PPE reduces disease severity if transmission occurs. This study investigated associations between workplace access to adequate PPE and self-reported COVID-19 symptom severity among in-person workers. We used data from the Michigan COVID-19 Recovery Surveillance Study (MI CReSS), a population-based survey of Michigan adults with a PCR-confirmed positive SARS-CoV-2 test. The sample was restricted to employed, in-person respondents with COVID-19 onset on or before November 15, 2020 (n = 893). Access to adequate PPE at work was categorized as often/always, sometimes, or rarely/never. Self-reported symptom severity was dichotomized as severe (severe or very severe) or not severe (mild, moderate, or asymptomatic). We used modified Poisson regression to estimate prevalence ratios for the relationship between adequate PPE at work and severe COVID-19 symptoms. We examined effect modification of the relationship by occupation by including a multiplicative interaction term for healthcare worker versus other occupations. After adjusting for sociodemographic and clinical covariates, respondents who rarely/never had access to PPE at work had a 24.7 % higher prevalence of self-reported severe COVID-19 symptoms (PR: 1.25, 95 % CI 1.03-1.51, p-value = 0.024) compared to respondents who often/always had access to PPE at work. Healthcare worker status did not modify the association between access to PPE and symptom severity. The findings from this study suggest an added benefit of PPE in reducing prevalence of severe COVID-19 among all in-person workers.

COVID-19 in the workplace: Self-reported source of exposure and availability of personal protective equipment by industry and occupation in Michigan.

OBJECTIVES: Fragmented industry and occupation surveillance data throughout the COVID-19 pandemic has left public health practitioners and organizations with an insufficient understanding of high-risk worker groups and the role of work in SARS-CoV-2 transmission. METHODS: We drew sequential probability samples of noninstitutionalized adults (18+) in the Michigan Disease Surveillance System with COVID-19 onset before November 16, 2020 (N = 237,468). Among the 6000 selected, 1839 completed a survey between June 23, 2020, and April 23, 2021. We compared in-person work status, source of self-reported SARS-CoV-2 exposure, and availability of adequate personal protective equipment (PPE) by industry and occupation using weighted descriptive statistics and Rao-Scott χ2 tests. We identified industries with a disproportionate share of COVID-19 infections by comparing our sample with the total share of employment by industry in Michigan using 2020 data from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. RESULTS: Employed respondents (n = 1244) were predominantly female (53.1%), aged 44 and under (54.4%), and non-Hispanic White (64.0%). 30.4% of all employed respondents reported work as the source of their SARS-CoV-2 exposure and 78.8% were in-person workers. Work-related exposure was prevalent in Nursing and Residential Care Facilities (65.2%); Justice, Public Order, and Safety Activities (63.3%); and Food Manufacturing (57.5%). By occupation, work-related exposure was highest among Protective Services (57.9%), Healthcare Support (56.5%), and Healthcare Practitioners (51.9%). Food Manufacturing; Nursing and Residential Care; and Justice, Public Order, and Safety Activities were most likely to report having adequate PPE "never" or "rarely" (36.4%, 27.9%, and 26.7%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Workplaces were a key source of self-reported SARS-CoV-2 exposure among employed Michigan residents during the first year of the pandemic. To prevent transmission, there is an urgent need in public health surveillance for the collection of industry and occupation data of people infected with COVID-19, as well as for future airborne infectious diseases for which we have little understanding of risk factors.

Personal and work-related factors associated with mental health among auto workers during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States.

Little is known about the psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on non-healthcare workers, especially among those who weathered unemployment related to shutdowns and supply-chain disruptions. We administered a cross-sectional survey (May - October 2021) to understand patterns between personal and work-related predictors and mental health symptoms among in-person auto workers in the United States (N = 1,165). The Generalized Anxiety Disorder-2 and the Patient Health Questionnaire-2 measured the presence of anxiety and depressive symptoms, respectively. Predictors included the presence of financial/family stressors, fear of SARS-CoV-2 exposure, perceptions of safety climate/culture, and clarity of workplace COVID-19 protocols. We used multinomial logistic regression to examine associations between the predictors and anxiety symptoms alone, depressive symptoms alone, and both anxiety and depressive symptoms compared to no symptoms, adjusting for socio-demographic characteristics, employee type, COVID-19 infection history, and preexisting psychological or psychiatric disorders. Experiencing financial/family stressors (adjusted odds ratio (AOR): 2.65, 95 % CI: 1.86-3.78) and feeling very concerned over SARS-CoV-2 exposure (AOR: 2.12, 95 % CI: 1.47-3.06) increased the odds of having both anxiety and depressive symptoms in comparison to experiencing no stressors, and feeling less than very concerned over exposure, respectively. Positive perceptions of safety climate/culture (AOR = 0.79, 95 % CI: 0.75-0.84) and strong clarity of COVID-19 protocols (AOR = 0.91, 95 %CI: 0.84-0.99) were associated with lower odds of both anxiety and depressive symptoms. These findings highlight the importance of job security and feeling safe at work in affecting the psychological impact of the pandemic on workers. Considerations for COVID-19 prevention in the workplace and mental health should go hand-in-hand.