Sex and Gender Differences in Occupational Hazard Exposures: a Scoping Review of the Recent Literature.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Comparative research on sex and/or gender differences in occupational hazard exposures is necessary for effective work injury and illness prevention strategies. This scoping review summarizes the peer-reviewed literature from 2009 to 2019 on exposure differences to occupational hazards between men and women, across occupations, and within the same occupation. RECENT FINDINGS: Fifty-eight studies retrieved from eight databases met our inclusion criteria. Of these, 30 studies were found on physical hazards, 38 studies on psychological/psychosocial hazards, 5 studies on biological hazards, and 17 studies on chemical hazards. The majority of studies reported that men were exposed to noise, vibration, medical radiation, physically demanding work, solar radiation, falls, biomechanical risks, chemical hazards, and blood contamination; while women were exposed to wet work, bullying and discrimination, work stress, and biological agents. Within the same occupations, men were more likely to be exposed to physical hazards, with the exception of women in health care occupations and exposure to prolonged standing. Women compared to men in the same occupations were more likely to experience harassment, while men compared to women in the same occupations reported higher work stress. Men reported more exposure to hazardous chemicals in the same occupations as women. The review suggests that men and women have different exposures to occupational hazards and that these differences are not solely due to a gendered distribution of the labor force by occupation. Findings may inform prevention efforts seeking to reduce gender inequalities in occupational health. Future research is needed to explain the reasons for sex/gender inequality differences in exposures within the same occupation.

Occupational exposure and post-traumatic stress disorder: A rapid review.

BACKGROUND: Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) can result from occupational exposures and poses a considerable burden to workers, their families, workplaces and to society in general. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to conduct a rapid review of the literature to answer the question: "Which occupations have exposures that may lead to a PTSD diagnosis?" METHODS: A rapid review was conducted in six steps: review question development, literature search, study selection (inclusion/exclusion), study characterization, data extraction, and data synthesis. RESULTS: The search identified 3428 unique references which were reviewed to find 16 relevant studies in 23 articles. The articles revealed associations between PTSD and rescue workers (police, firefighters, etc.), health care professionals, transit drivers, and bank employees which seem well supported by the literature. Some studies also suggest potential associations with PTSD and construction and extraction, electricians, manufacturing, installation, maintenance and repair, transportation and material moving, and clerical workers. CONCLUSIONS: A rapid review of the peer-reviewed scientific literature of PTSD prevalence or treatment suggests many occupations have exposures that could be associated with PTSD. Occupational traumatic events were most often associated with PTSD diagnosis. More research is needed to better understand the association between occupation and PTSD.

How receptive are patients to medical students in Australian hospitals? A cross-sectional survey of a public and a private hospital.

BACKGROUND: Medical student numbers in Australian universities have more than doubled since 2000. There are concerns about the ability for existing clinical training sites to accommodate this increase in student numbers, and there have been calls to increase training in private hospitals. The receptiveness of patients in private hospitals will influence the success of such placements. AIMS: We aimed to evaluate whether patients in a private hospital are as receptive to medical students as patients in a public hospital. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey of patients conducted at a private and a public teaching hospital in Melbourne, Australia. Main outcome measures were willingness to allow a medical student to participate in an interview, physical examination and procedures (electrocardiogram, venepuncture and digital rectal examination), and patient attitudes towards medical students as assessed by a series of 20 attitude statements and a summative attitude score. RESULTS: Patients at the private hospital were more willing than patients at the public hospital to allow a medical student to take their history unsupervised (112/146, 76.7% vs 90/141, 63.8%; P = 0.02). The distribution of patient willingness did not otherwise differ between hospitals for physical examination or procedures. There was no difference in the mean attitude score between hospitals (15.3 ± 0.8 private vs 15.4 ± 1.2 public, P = 0.38), and responses differed between hospitals for only four of the 20 attitude statements. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that patients in a private hospital are at least as receptive to medical students as patients in a public hospital.