ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: While the occupational risk of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection for healthcare personnel in the United States has been relatively well characterized, less information is available on the occupational risk for workers employed in other settings. Even fewer studies have attempted to compare risks across occupations and industries. Using differential proportionate distribution as an approximation, we evaluated excess risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection by occupation and industry among non-healthcare workers in six states. METHODS: We analyzed data on occupation and industry of employment from a six-state callback survey of adult non-healthcare workers with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection and population-based reference data on employment patterns, adjusted for the effect of telework, from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. We estimated the differential proportionate distribution of SARS-CoV-2 infection by occupation and industry using the proportionate morbidity ratio (PMR). RESULTS: Among a sample of 1111 workers with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, significantly higher-than-expected proportions of workers were employed in service occupations (PMR 1.3, 99% confidence interval [CI] 1.1-1.5) and in the transportation and utilities (PMR 1.4, 99% CI 1.1-1.8) and leisure and hospitality industries (PMR 1.5, 99% CI 1.2-1.9). CONCLUSIONS: We found evidence of significant differences in the proportionate distribution of SARS-CoV-2 infection by occupation and industry among respondents in a multistate, population-based survey, highlighting the excess risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection borne by some worker populations, particularly those whose jobs require frequent or prolonged close contact with other people.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Humans , United States/epidemiology , COVID-19/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2 , Occupations , Industry , Health PersonnelABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Work-related exposures play an important role in SARS-CoV-2 transmission, yet few studies have measured the risk of COVID-19 across occupations and industries. METHODS: During September 2020 - May 2021, the Wisconsin Department of Health Services collected occupation and industry data as part of routine COVID-19 case investigations. Adults aged 18-64 years with confirmed or probable COVID-19 in Wisconsin were assigned standardized occupation and industry codes. Cumulative incidence rates were weighted for non-response and calculated using full-time equivalent (FTE) workforce denominators from the 2020 American Community Survey. RESULTS: An estimated 11.6% of workers (347,013 of 2.98 million) in Wisconsin, ages 18-64 years, had COVID-19 from September 2020 to May 2021. The highest incidence by occupation (per 100 full-time equivalents) occurred among personal care and services workers (22.4), healthcare practitioners and support staff (20.7), and protective services workers (20.7). High risk sub-groups included nursing assistants and personal care aides (28.8), childcare workers (25.8), food and beverage service workers (25.3), personal appearance workers (24.4), and law enforcement workers (24.1). By industry, incidence was highest in healthcare (18.6); the highest risk sub-sectors were nursing care facilities (30.5) and warehousing (28.5). CONCLUSIONS: This analysis represents one of the most complete examinations to date of COVID-19 incidence by occupation and industry. Our approach demonstrates the value of standardized occupational data collection by public health, and may be a model for improved occupational surveillance elsewhere. Workers at higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 exposure may benefit from targeted workplace COVID-19 vaccination and mitigation efforts.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic introduced a new compensable infectious disease to workplaces. METHODS: This was a descriptive analysis of Wisconsin COVID workers' compensation (WC) claims between March 12 and December 31, 2020. The impact of the presumption law (March 12 to June 10, 2020) was also evaluated. RESULTS: Less than 1% of working-age residents with COVID-19 filed a claim. COVID-19 WC claim rates (per 100,000 FTE) were notably low for frontline industry sectors such as Retail Trade (n = 115), Manufacturing (n = 88), and Wholesale Trade (n = 31). Healthcare workers (764 claims per 100,000 FTE) comprised 73.2% of COVID-19 claims. Most claims (52.8%) were denied and the proportion of denied claims increased significantly after the presumption period for both first responders and other occupations. CONCLUSION: The presumption law made benefits accessible primarily to first responders. Further changes to WC systems are needed to offset the individual and collective costs of infectious diseases.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Workers' Compensation , Humans , COVID-19/epidemiology , Wisconsin/epidemiology , Pandemics , IndustryABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Surveillance systems lack detailed occupational exposure information from workers with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection. The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health partnered with 6 states to collect information from adults diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection who worked in person (outside the home) in non-healthcare settings during the 2 weeks prior to illness onset. METHODS: The survey captured demographic, medical, and occupational characteristics and work- and non-work-related risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection. Reported close contact with a person known or suspected to have SARS-CoV-2 infection was categorized by setting as exposure at work, exposure outside of work only, or no known exposure/did not know. Frequencies and percentages of exposure types are compared by respondent characteristics and risk factors. RESULTS: Of 1111 respondents, 19.4% reported exposure at work, 23.4% reported exposure outside of work only, and 57.2% reported no known exposure/did not know. Workers in protective service occupations (48.8%) and public administration industries (35.6%) reported exposure at work most often. More than one third (33.7%) of respondents who experienced close contact with ≥10 coworkers per day and 28.8% of respondents who experienced close contact with ≥10 customers/clients per day reported exposures at work. CONCLUSIONS: Exposure to occupational SARS-CoV-2 was common among respondents. Examining differences in exposures among different worker groups can help identify populations with the greatest need for prevention interventions. The benefits of recording employment characteristics as standard demographic information will remain relevant as new and reemerging public health issues occur.