Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 1 de 1
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Rev. Asoc. Esp. Espec. Med. Trab ; 31(1): 19-28, mar. 2022. ilus
Article in Spanish | IBECS | ID: ibc-210079

ABSTRACT

Introducción: El contagio COVID-19 en trabajadores sanitarios y socio-sanitarios en España se considera accidente de trabajo (AT) si lo certifican los Servicios de Prevención de Riesgos Laborales (SPRL). El objetivo del estudio fue verificar su cumplimiento en nuestra Área y subsanar posibles deficiencias. Material y Métodos: Estudio descriptivo del 28 de mayo de 2020 al 27 de enero de 2021. Inspección solicitó certificado AT a SPRL, y que el Instituto Nacional de Seguridad Social (INSS) reconociera el AT si la Mutua lo negaba. Resultados: 204 casos: 55,4% sanitarios, 52,5% públicos. Certificado AT de SPRL: 61,8%. INSS reconoció AT: 41,2%. Mayor reconocimiento AT en trabajadores socio-sanitarios y privados, menor en sanitarios y públicos del Área V. La intervención de la Inspección mejoró parcialmente los resultados. Conclusiones: Pese a cumplir los requisitos legales la infección COVID-19 en estos colectivos no siempre fue reconocida AT. El papel garante de la Inspección fue insufiente. (AU)


Introduction: In Spain, COVID-19 infection in the health and social-health workers is considered as an occupational accident (OA) if the Occupational Risk Prevention Services (ORPS) certificate it. The aim of our study was to verify it in our area and to correct deficiencies. Material and Method: Descriptive study from May 28, 2020 to January 27, 2021. The health Inspection Unit of our area required OA certificate to the ORPS, and the assessment by the National Institute of Social Security (NISS) when the private insurance fund denied OA. Results: Total of 204 cases (55.4% healthcare workers, 52.5% from public centres (33.3% in our area). ORPS OA certificate: 61.8%. NISS recognised OA: 41.2%. OA recognition was greater in socio-health and private workers than in sanitary and public workers. The medical inspection Unit intervention partially improve the results. Conclusions: Despite complying with legal requirements there were no OA recognition in all cases of COVID-19 infection in these workers. The medical inspection Unit was not guarantor enough. (AU)


Subject(s)
Humans , Pandemics , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus , Accidents, Occupational , Health Workforce , Occupational Risks , Epidemiology, Descriptive , Retrospective Studies , Sanitary Inspection
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...