Occupational exposure to pesticides and neurobehavioral outcomes. Impact of different original and recalled exposure measures on the associations.

BACKGROUND: Several measures of occupational exposure to pesticides have been used to study associations between exposure to pesticides and neurobehavioral outcomes. This study assessed the impact of different exposure measures for glyphosate and mancozeb on the association with neurobehavioral outcomes based on original and recalled self-reported data with 246 smallholder farmers in Uganda. METHODS: The association between the 6 exposure measures and 6 selected neurobehavioral test scores was investigated using linear multivariable regression models. Exposure measures included original exposure measures for the previous year in 2017: (i) application status (yes/no), (ii) number of application days, (iii) average exposure-intensity scores (EIS) of an application and (iv) number of EIS-weighted application days. Two additional measures were collected in 2019: (v) recalled application status and (vi) recalled EIS for the respective periods in 2017. RESULTS: Recalled applicator status and EIS were between 1.2 and 1.4 times more frequent and higher for both pesticides than the original application status and EIS. Adverse associations between the different original measures of exposure to glyphosate and 4 neurobehavioral tests were observed. Glyphosate exposure based on recalled information and all mancozeb exposure measures were not associated with the neurobehavioral outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The relation between the different original self-reported glyphosate exposure measures and neurobehavioral test scores appeared to be robust. When based on recalled exposure measures, associations observed with the original exposure measures were no longer present. Therefore, future epidemiological studies on self-reported exposure should critically evaluate the potential bias towards the null in observed exposure-response associations.

A Wrist-Worn Internet of Things Sensor Node for Wearable Equivalent Daylight Illuminance Monitoring.

Light exposure is a vital regulator of physiology and behavior in humans. However, monitoring of light exposure is not included in current wearable Internet of Things (IoT) devices, and only recently have international standards defined [Formula: see text] -optic equivalent daylight illuminance (EDI) measures for how the eye responds to light. This article reports a wearable light sensor node that can be incorporated into the IoT to provide monitoring of EDI exposure in real-world settings. We present the system design, electronic performance testing, and accuracy of EDI measurements when compared to a calibrated spectral source. This includes consideration of the directional response of the sensor, and a comparison of performance when placed on different parts of the body, and a demonstration of practical use over 7 days. Our device operates for 3.5 days between charges, with a sampling period of 30 s. It has 10 channels of measurement, over the range 415-910 nm, balancing accuracy and cost considerations. Measured [Formula: see text]-opic EDI results for 13 devices show a mean absolute error of less than 0.07 log lx, and a minimum between device correlation of 0.99. These findings demonstrate that accurate light sensing is feasible, including at wrist worn locations. We provide an experimental platform for use in future investigations in real-world light exposure monitoring and IoT-based lighting control.

Estimating occupational disease burden: a way forward.

Estimates of occupational disease burden provide important information on which effective policy and regulations can be developed. However, there is no direct way that these data can be obtained, and most burden estimates are derived by merging different data from diverse sources to synthesize estimates of the number of people made ill or who have died from workplace exposures. In recent years, several research groups have published estimates of occupational health burden at national or global scales; these are not always consistent. The World Health Organisation and the International Labour Organisation have taken on the task of producing occupational disease burden estimates for several workplace agents, which we assume are to be seen as the definitive global, regional, and national data. In this commentary, we critique the WHO/ILO approach for their estimates of the non-melanoma skin cancer burden from solar ultraviolet radiation and some of their results for hazardous particulates. We provide recommendations for researchers undertaking occupational burden estimates that they should report along with their data.

Trends in work-related respiratory diseases attributed to nickel, chromium and cobalt in the UK: descriptive findings from The Health and Occupation Research (THOR) network 1996-2019.

BACKGROUND: Occupational exposure to metals can be associated with respiratory diseases which can adversely affect the individual's health, finances and employment. Despite this, little is known about the incidence of these respiratory conditions over prolonged periods of time. AIMS: This study aimed to investigate the trends in the incidence of work-related respiratory diseases attributed to nickel, chromium and cobalt in the UK. METHODS: Cases of occupational respiratory diseases caused by nickel, chromium or cobalt reported to Surveillance of Work-related and Occupational Respiratory Disease (SWORD), the UK-based surveillance scheme between 1996 and 2019 (inclusive), were extracted and grouped into six 4-year time periods. Cases were characterised by causative metal exposure, occupational and industrial sector. Incidence rates diseases (adjusted for physician participation and response rate) were calculated using ONS employment data. RESULTS: Of cases reported to SWORD during the study period, 1% (173 actual cases) of respiratory problems were attributed to nickel, chromium or cobalt. Diagnoses of asthma compromised the largest proportion of diagnoses (74.4%), followed by lung cancer (8.9%) and pneumoconiosis (6.7%). Cases had a mean age of 47 years (SD 13); 93% were men. The annual incidence fell from 1.6 per million employed in the first 4-year period, to 0.2 in the most recent period. CONCLUSIONS: Over 24 years, a decline in the incidence of metal-related occupational respiratory diseases was observed in the UK. This could be attributed to improvements in working conditions which resulted in reduced metal exposure but could also be due to closure of industries that might have generated case returns.

Risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection at a UK electricity-generating company: a test-negative design case-control study.

OBJECTIVES: Identify workplace risk factors for SARS-CoV-2 infection, using data collected by a UK electricity-generating company. METHODS: Using a test-negative design case-control study, we estimated the OR of infection by job category, site, test reason, sex, vaccination status, vulnerability, site outage and site COVID-19 weekly risk rating, adjusting for age, test date and test type. RESULTS: From an original 80 077 COVID-19 tests, there were 70 646 included in the final analysis. Most exclusions were due to being visitor tests (5030) or tests after an individual first tested positive (2968).Women were less likely to test positive than men (OR=0.71; 95% CI 0.58 to 0.86). Test reason was strongly associated with positivity and although not a cause of infection itself, due to differing test regimes by area, it was a strong confounder for other variables. Compared with routine tests, tests due to symptoms were highest risk (94.99; 78.29 to 115.24), followed by close contact (16.73; 13.80 to 20.29) and broader-defined work contact 2.66 (1.99 to 3.56). After adjustment, we found little difference in risk by job category, but some differences by site with three sites showing substantially lower risks, and one site showing higher risks in the final model. CONCLUSIONS: In general, infection risk was not associated with job category. Vulnerable individuals were at slightly lower risk, tests during outages were higher risk, vaccination showed no evidence of an effect on testing positive, and site COVID-19 risk rating did not show an ordered trend in positivity rates.

Trends in occupational and work-related contact dermatitis attributed to nickel, chromium and cobalt in the UK: findings from The Health and Occupation Research network 1996-2019.

BACKGROUND: Occupational exposure to metals such as nickel, chromium and cobalt can be associated with contact dermatitis, which can adversely affect an individual's health, finances and employment. Despite this, little is known about the incidence of metal-related occupational contact dermatitis over prolonged periods of time. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the medically reported trends in the incidence of work-related contact dermatitis attributed to nickel, chromium and cobalt in the UK. METHODS: Incidence and trends in cases of occupational contact dermatitis caused by nickel, chromium or cobalt between 1996 and 2019 (inclusive), reported to the EPIDERM surveillance scheme, were investigated and compared with trends in the incidence of occupational contact dermatitis attributed to agents other than the aforementioned metals. A sensitivity analysis restricting the study cohort to cases attributed to only one type of metal was also conducted. RESULTS: Of all cases reported to EPIDERM during the study period, 2374 (12%) were attributed to nickel, chromium or cobalt. Cases predominantly comprised females (59%), with a mean (SD) age (males and females) of 38 (13) years. Cases were most frequently reported in manufacturing, construction, and human health and social activity industries. The most frequently reported occupations were hairdressing, and sales and retail (assistants, cashiers and checkout operators). The highest annual incidence rate of contact dermatitis was observed in females (2.60 per 100 000 persons employed per year), with the first and second peak seen in those aged 16-24 and ≥ 65 years, respectively. A statistically significant decrease in the incidence of occupational contact dermatitis attributed to metals over the study period was observed for all occupations (annual average change -6.9%, 95% confidence interval -7.8 to -5.9), with much of the decrease occurring between 1996 and 2007. Similar findings were obtained in the sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Over a period of 24 years, there has been a statistically significant decline in the incidence of metal-related occupational contact dermatitis in the UK. This could be attributed not only to improvements in working conditions, which have reduced metal exposure, but could also be due to the closure of industries in the UK that might have generated cases of contact dermatitis owing to metal exposure.

Utility of the capabilities, opportunities, motivations model for understanding changes in behavior.

BACKGROUND: Wearing face coverings to prevent airborne viral transmission has at times been legally mandated, followed by periods when rules were relaxed. The present study tracks changes in face covering and the impacts on people's perceptions of their capabilities, opportunities and motivations. METHODS: Three-wave survey. At wave 1 (25 January-6 February 2022), 10 622 UK adults reported: (a) sociodemographic characteristics; (b) face covering in work, public transport and indoor leisure settings and (c) capabilities, opportunities and motivations. Measures were repeated 1-18 March 2022 and 20 May-6 June 2022. Data were analyzed descriptively, within-participants analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) and multiple linear regression. RESULTS: Face covering decreased over time as rules around the wearing of face coverings relaxed. Perceptions of capabilities, opportunities and motivations to wear face coverings were consistently associated with the actual wearing of face coverings, with marked decreases in motivations over time. CONCLUSIONS: Decreases in motivations seem to explain best the reasons for declining levels of face covering. Further work is required to develop interventions to change people's motivations and promote the wearing of face coverings, should they be required in the future.

Factors influencing occupational exposure to pyrethroids and glyphosate: An analysis of urinary biomarkers in Malaysia, Uganda and the United Kingdom.

BACKGROUND: Long-term exposure to pesticides is often assessed using semi-quantitative models. To improve these models, a better understanding of how occupational factors determine exposure (e.g., as estimated by biomonitoring) would be valuable. METHODS: Urine samples were collected from pesticide applicators in Malaysia, Uganda, and the UK during mixing/application days (and also during non-application days in Uganda). Samples were collected pre- and post-activity on the same day and analysed for biomarkers of active ingredients (AIs), including synthetic pyrethroids (via the metabolite 3-phenoxybenzoic acid [3-PBA]) and glyphosate, as well as creatinine. We performed multilevel Tobit regression models for each study to assess the relationship between exposure modifying factors (e.g., mixing/application of AI, duration of activity, personal protective equipment [PPE]) and urinary biomarkers of exposure. RESULTS: From the Malaysia, Uganda, and UK studies, 81, 84, and 106 study participants provided 162, 384 and 212 urine samples, respectively. Pyrethroid use on the sampling day was most common in Malaysia (n = 38; 47%), and glyphosate use was most prevalent in the UK (n = 93; 88%). Median pre- and post-activity 3-PBA concentrations were similar, with higher median concentrations post-compared to pre-activity for glyphosate samples in the UK (1.7 to 0.5 µg/L) and Uganda (7.6 to 0.8 µg/L) (glyphosate was not used in the Malaysia study). There was evidence from individual studies that higher urinary biomarker concentrations were associated with mixing/application of the AI on the day of urine sampling, longer duration of mixing/application, lower PPE protection, and less education/literacy, but no factor was consistently associated with exposure across biomarkers in the three studies. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest a need for AI-specific interpretation of exposure modifying factors as the relevance of exposure routes, levels of detection, and farming systems/practices may be very context and AI-specific.

The application of the mobile application for the assessment of cleaning workers' exposure to cleaning products: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Cleaning product use has been associated with adverse respiratory health effects such as asthma in cleaning staff and healthcare workers. Research in health effects from cleaning products has largely depended upon collecting exposure information by questionnaires which has limitations such as recall bias and underestimation of exposure. The aim of this study was to develop a Cleaning and Hazardous Products Exposure Logging (CHaPEL) app with a barcode scanner and to test the feasibility of this app with university cleaners. METHODS: The CHaPEL app was developed to collect information on demographics, individual product information, and exposure information. It also included an ease-of-use survey. A pilot study with university cleaning workers was undertaken in which cleaning workers scanned each product after use and answered the survey. Respiratory hazards of cleaning substances in the scanned cleaning products were screened by safety data sheets, a Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationship model and an asthmagen list established by an expert group in the US. RESULTS: Eighteen university cleaners participated in this study over a period of 5 weeks. In total, 77 survey responses and 6 cleaning products were collected and all reported that using the app was easy. The most frequently used product was a multi-surface cleaner followed by a disinfectant. Out of 14 substances in cleaning products, ethanolamine and Alkyl (C12-16) dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride were found as respiratory hazardous substances. CONCLUSION: The CHaPEL app is a user-friendly immediate way to successfully collect exposure information using the barcodes of cleaning products. This tool could be useful for future epidemiological studies focused on exposure assessment with less interruption to the workers.

Potential contribution of vaccination uptake to occupational differences in risk of SARS-CoV-2: analysis of the ONS COVID-19 Infection Survey.

OBJECTIVES: To assess variation in vaccination uptake across occupational groups as a potential explanation for variation in risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. DESIGN: We analysed data from the UK Office of National Statistics COVID-19 Infection Survey linked to vaccination data from the National Immunisation Management System in England from 1 December 2020 to 11 May 2022. We analysed vaccination uptake and SARS-CoV-2 infection risk by occupational group and assessed whether adjustment for vaccination reduced the variation in risk between occupational groups. RESULTS: Estimated rates of triple vaccination were high across all occupational groups (80% or above), but were lowest for food processing (80%), personal care (82%), hospitality (83%), manual occupations (84%) and retail (85%). High rates were observed for individuals working in health (95% for office based, 92% for those in patient-facing roles) and education (91%) and office-based workers not included in other categories (90%). The impact of adjusting for vaccination when estimating relative risks of infection was generally modest (ratio of hazard ratios across all occupational groups reduced from 1.37 to 1.32), but was consistent with the hypothesis that low vaccination rates contribute to elevated risk in some groups. CONCLUSIONS: Variation in vaccination coverage might account for a modest proportion of occupational differences in infection risk. Vaccination rates were uniformly very high in this cohort, which may suggest that the participants are not representative of the general population. Accordingly, these results should be considered tentative pending the accumulation of additional evidence.

Self-reported and urinary biomarker-based measures of exposure to glyphosate and mancozeb and sleep problems among smallholder farmers in Uganda.

OBJECTIVE: We aim to showcase the impact of applying eight different self-reported and urinary biomarker-based exposure measures for glyphosate and mancozeb on the association with sleep problems in a study among 253 smallholder farmers in Uganda. METHODS: The questionnaire-based exposure measures included: (1) the number of application days of any pesticide in the last 7 days (never, 1-2; >2 days) and six glyphosate and mancozeb-specific measures: (2) application status over the last 12 months (yes/no), (3) recent application status (never, last 7 days and last 12 months), (4) the number of application days last 12 months, (5) average exposure-intensity scores (EIS) and (6) EIS-weighted number of application days in last 12 months. Based on 384 repeated urinary biomarker concentrations of ethylene thiourea (ETU) and glyphosate from 84 farmers, we also estimated (7) average biomarker concentrations for all 253 farmers. Also in the 84 farmers the measured pre-work and post-work biomarker concentrations were used (8). Multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess the association between the exposure measures and selected Medical Outcomes Study Sleep Scale (MOS-SS) indices (6-item, sleep inadequacy and snoring). RESULTS: We observed positive associations between (1) any pesticide application in the last 7 days with all three MOS-SS indices. Glyphosate application in the last 7 days (3) and mancozeb application in the last 12 months (3) were associated with the 6-item sleep problem index. The estimated average urinary glyphosate concentrations showed an exposure-response association with the 6-item sleep problem index and sleep inadequacy in the same direction as based on self-reported glyphosate application in the last 7 days. In the analysis with the subset of 84 farmers, both measured and modelled post-work urinary glyphosate concentration showed an association with snoring. CONCLUSIONS: Self-reported, estimated average biomarker concentrations and measured urinary biomarker exposure measures of glyphosate and mancozeb showed similar exposure-response associations with sleep outcomes.

how these findings canPublic transport: lessons learned by the sector through the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on the operations and functionality of the public transport sector in the UK. This paper reflects on the experience of this sector through the pandemic period, and considers recommendations for any future mitigations required for either new COVID-19 waves or a different public health emergency. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were carried out with public transport experts, organisational leaders, workers and passengers in two phases: Phase 1 from January to May 2021, and Phase 2 from December 2021 to February 2022. Interviews were analysed thematically. RESULTS: Using the 'What? So What? Now What?' reflective model, ideas are drawn out to describe (a) what changes occurred, (b) what effects these changes had on service provision as well as perceptions of risk and mitigation and (c) what lessons have been learned and how these findings can feed into pandemic preparedness for the future. Respondent reflections focussed on the importance of communication, leadership, and maintaining compliance. CONCLUSIONS: The wealth of experience gained through the COVID-19 pandemic in the public transport sector is extremely valuable. Through reflection on this experience, specific recommendations are made relating to these factors, covering: maintaining links across industry, access to information and data, understanding of mitigation effectiveness, improving messaging, challenges of behavioural mitigations, and clear lines of accountability. The recommendations made on the basis of this reflective process will help to improve public health strategy within the public transport sector.

Associations between light exposure and sleep timing and sleepiness while awake in a sample of UK adults in everyday life.

Experimental and interventional studies show that light can regulate sleep timing and sleepiness while awake by setting the phase of circadian rhythms and supporting alertness. The extent to which differences in light exposure explain variations in sleep and sleepiness within and between individuals in everyday life remains less clear. Here, we establish a method to address this deficit, incorporating an open-source wearable wrist-worn light logger (SpectraWear) and smartphone-based online data collection. We use it to simultaneously record longitudinal light exposure (in melanopic equivalent daylight illuminance), sleep timing, and subjective alertness over seven days in a convenience sample of 59 UK adults without externally imposed circadian challenge (e.g., shift work or jetlag). Participants reliably had strong daily rhythms in light exposure but frequently were exposed to less light during the daytime and more light in pre-bedtime and sleep episodes than recommended [T. M. Brown et al., PLoS Biol. 20, e3001571 (2022)]. Prior light exposure over several hours was associated with lower subjective sleepiness with, in particular, brighter light in the late sleep episode and after wake linked to reduced early morning sleepiness (sleep inertia). Higher pre-bedtime light exposure was associated with longer sleep onset latency. Early sleep timing was correlated with more reproducible and robust daily patterns of light exposure and higher daytime/lower night-time light exposure. Our study establishes a method for collecting longitudinal sleep and health/performance data in everyday life and provides evidence of associations between light exposure and important determinants of sleep health and performance.

Theory-based Trial to Promote Uptake and Sustained Use of Face Coverings During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Transmission of airborne viruses can be mitigated by wearing face coverings but evidence suggests that face covering declines with the removal of relevant legislation, partly due to low automatic motivation. PURPOSE: Test whether an intervention based on implementation intentions could support people's automatic motivation and promote face covering during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: Randomized controlled design. At baseline (May 20 to June 6, 2022), 7,835 UK adults reported how much time they spent wearing face coverings in work, public transport, and indoor leisure settings as well as their capabilities, opportunities, and motivations. 3,871 participants were randomized to form implementation intentions; 3,964 control participants completed questionnaires only. Measures were repeated 6 months postbaseline (November 1 to November 14, 2022). Data were analyzed using mixed measures ANOVAs and Bayes Factors to examine whether the observed data supported the experimental hypothesis. RESULTS: The proportion of time spend wearing face coverings declined substantially across the 6-month study period, from 15.28% to 9.87% in work settings, 38.31% to 24.55% on public transport, and 9.58% to 7.85% in leisure settings. Bayes Factors indicated moderate relative evidence of no effect of implementation intentions on behavior in work and leisure settings, and inconclusive evidence of a positive effect on public transport. CONCLUSIONS: In the context of declining COVID-19 rates and removal of legal mandates, implementation intentions were not effective in sustaining face covering. Further research is required to ensure that evidence-based interventions are prepared and deployed in the event of future pandemics.

The spread of viruses through the air can be reduced by people wearing face coverings. The evidence suggests that face covering reduces with the removal of relevant legislation, partly due to habits not being formed. The aim of the present study was to test whether an intervention designed to help people to form new habits could support people's face covering during the COVID-19 pandemic. We asked 7,835 UK adults how much time they spent wearing face coverings in work, public transport, and indoor leisure settings. We chose 3,871 participants at random to form new habits; 3,964 participants completed questionnaires only. Measures were repeated 6 months later. The proportion of time spend wearing face coverings declined sharply across the 6-month study period, from 15.28% to 9.87% in work settings, 38.31% to 24.55% on public transport, and 9.58% to 7.85% in leisure settings. Our analyses showed a small positive effect of forming new habits on wearing face coverings in public transport settings. In the context of declining COVID-19 rates and the removal of legal mandates, our intervention was not effective in sustaining face covering. Further research is required to ensure that evidence-based interventions are prepared and deployed in the event of future pandemics.

A deep dive into selected work sectors during the COVID-19 pandemic and the "living with COVID" phase: understanding similarities and differences in practice, perceptions, and preparedness.

OBJECTIVES: When it comes to controlling workplace transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, different workplaces and industrial sectors face different challenges, both in terms of likely transmission routes and which control measures can be practically, economically, and effectively implemented. This article considers a large body of research in the United Kingdom across different work sectors and time points during the COVID-19 pandemic to better understand mitigation measures, challenges to mitigating the risk of SARS-COV-2 transmission, knowledge gaps, and barriers and enablers to control viral transmission. METHODS: Data is drawn from 2 phases of research. Phase 1 gathered data from an interactive workshop (April 2022) where PROTECT researchers working across 8 work sectors shared knowledge and expertise from research conducted between 2020 and 2022. Phase 2 revisited 6 of these sectors to explore participants' views on the "living with COVID" phase of the pandemic (February-October 2022) through qualitative interviews. RESULTS: Our findings emphasise the importance of considering the characteristics of each work sector (and their sub-sectors), relative to the physical workplace and workforce, the ways organisations operate, and how they interact with the public. Study findings show that participant's views and organisational practices changed quickly and significantly over the course of the pandemic. Most participants initially perceived that the majority of risk mitigations would remain in place for the foreseeable future. However, following the change in Government Guidance towards "living with COVID", most mitigation measures were quickly removed and it had become necessary for sectors/organisations to restore normal operations, thereby treating the COVID-19 virus like any other illness, while remaining prepared for future health emergencies that may arise. CONCLUSION: We suggest that national policy makers and organisational leaders remain mindful of the lessons learned and knowledge gained at all levels (national, regional, local, organisational, and individual) during the COVID-19 pandemic. We make recommendations in support of recovery as sectors/organisations continue "living with COVID" and other respiratory diseases; balanced with longer term planning for the next public health crisis.

Occupational differences in the prevalence and severity of long-COVID: analysis of the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Infection Survey.

OBJECTIVES: To establish whether prevalence and severity of long-COVID symptoms vary by industry and occupation. METHODS: We used Office for National Statistics COVID-19 Infection Survey (CIS) data (February 2021-April 2022) of working-age participants (16-65 years). Exposures were industry, occupation and major Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) group. Outcomes were self-reported: (1) long-COVID symptoms and (2) reduced function due to long-COVID. Binary (outcome 1) and ordered (outcome 2) logistic regression were used to estimate odds ratios (OR)and prevalence (marginal means). RESULTS: Public facing industries, including teaching and education, social care, healthcare, civil service, retail and transport industries and occupations, had the highest likelihood of long-COVID. By major SOC group, those in caring, leisure and other services (OR 1.44, 95% CIs 1.38 to 1.52) had substantially elevated odds than average. For almost all exposures, the pattern of ORs for long-COVID symptoms followed SARS-CoV-2 infections, except for professional occupations (eg, some healthcare, education, scientific occupations) (infection: OR<1 ; long-COVID: OR>1). The probability of reporting long-COVID for industry ranged from 7.7% (financial services) to 11.6% (teaching and education); whereas the prevalence of reduced function by 'a lot' ranged from 17.1% (arts, entertainment and recreation) to 22%-23% (teaching and education and armed forces) and to 27% (not working). CONCLUSIONS: The risk and prevalence of long-COVID differs across industries and occupations. Generally, it appears that likelihood of developing long-COVID symptoms follows likelihood of SARS-CoV-2 infection, except for professional occupations. These findings highlight sectors and occupations where further research is needed to understand the occupational factors resulting in long-COVID.

Irritant asthma and work: cases from the UK SWORD reporting scheme from 1999 to 2018.

BACKGROUND: Acute irritant asthma is a preventable health consequence of a workplace exposure and has a number of adverse outcomes. While cases and case series are reported, little is known about the causes and incidence of this condition over prolonged periods of time. AIMS: We aimed to estimate the reported incidence of irritant asthma referred to a national reporting scheme, and how this has changed over time. METHODS: Cases of irritant asthma reported to SWORD, the UK-based Surveillance of Work-related Occupational Respiratory Diseases scheme, were grouped into four 5-year time periods from 1999 onwards. Likely causative exposures, job, work sector and incidence rates were analysed over time. RESULTS: 307 actual cases equated to 1066 estimated cases; actual cases had a mean age of 46 years (SD 17.8); 70.7% were male. The annual incidence fell from 1.98 per million employed in the first 5-year period, to 0.56 in the most recent. Eleven occupational codes were associated with six or more attributed cases, and between them accounted for 38% of all cases. Thirteen exposure categories were associated with five or more cases. These were formaldehyde (n=5), cutting oils and coolants (n=6), isocyanates (n=6), pesticides and herbicides (n=6), welding fumes (n=7), paints (n=7), solder and colophony (n=7), solvents (n=9), fuel oil, diesel and ill-defined fumes (n=10), chlorine and hypochlorites (n=15), acids (n=23), smoke (n=25) and cleaning products and sterilising agents (n=39). CONCLUSIONS: While the incidence of irritant asthma may have fallen, cases are persistently attributed to well-described causes. A persistence of cases attributed to cleaning agents was seen.

An Epidemiological Study of Lung Cancer and Selected Other Cancers among Namibian Uranium Workers.

The Rössing Uranium Limited (RUL) open-cast uranium mine in Namibia has operated since 1976. Studies of underground uranium miners from Europe and North America have shown increased cancer risks (principally lung cancer). We explored the association between radiation doses and selected cancers in RUL mineworkers. Employees with at least one-year of continuous employment between 1976 and 2010 were included. Incident cancer cases [lung, extra-thoracic airways (ETA), leukemia, brain and kidney] occurring before the end of 2015 were identified from the Namibian and South African National Cancer Registries, and RUL's occupational health provider. Using a case-cohort design, data on exposure and confounding factors were collected for all cancer cases among the study cohort and a stratified random sample (sub-cohort) of the cohort, including cases. Radiation doses were estimated based on annual dose records held by RUL. In total, 76 cancer cases (32 lung, 18 ETA, 8 leukemia, 9 brain, 9 kidney) and a sub-cohort of 1,121 sampled from 7,901 RUL employees were included. A weighted Cox model, adjusted for available known confounders, produced a rate ratio (95% CI) for lung cancer of 1.42 (0.42, 4.77) and 1.22 (0.26, 5.68), respectively, for medium and higher cumulative lung dose categories compared to the lower category, and 1.04 (0.95, 1.13) for a dose increase of 10 mSv. This study faced considerable challenges with respect to case ascertainment, exposure estimates, and ensuring accuracy of key variables. Persuasive consistent evidence for elevated cancer risk was not found for radiation or other exposures studied at the Rössing uranium mine.

Areas of enduring COVID-19 prevalence: drivers of prevalence and mitigating strategies.

BACKGROUND: UK local authorities that experienced sustained high levels of COVID-19 between 1st March 2020 and 28th February 2021 were described by the UK Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies as areas of enduring prevalence. This research was carried out in order to examine the views of local authority Directors of Public Health, who played a crucial role in the local response to COVID-19, on reasons for sustained high levels of prevalence in some areas, alongside an investigation of the mitigation strategies that they implemented during the course of the pandemic. METHODS: Interviews were conducted with Directors of Public Health in 19 local authority areas across England, between July and November 2021. This included nine areas identified as areas of enduring prevalence and ten 'comparison' areas. RESULTS: The outcomes of this study suggests that the geographical differences in prevalence rates are strongly influenced by health inequalities. Structural factors including deprivation, employment, and housing, due to their disproportionate impact on specific groups, converged with demographic factors, including ethnicity and age, and vaccination rates, and were identified as the main drivers of enduring prevalence. There are key differences in these drivers both within and, to a lesser extent, between local authorities. Other than these structural barriers, no major differences in facilitators or barriers to COVID-19 mitigation were identified between areas of varying prevalence. The main features of successful mitigation strategies were a locally tailored approach and partnership working involving local authority departments working with local health, community, voluntary and business organisations. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to add the voices of Directors of Public Health, who played a crucial role in the local COVID-19 response. Areas of enduring prevalence existed during the pandemic which were caused by a complex mix of structural factors related to inequalities. Participants advised that more research is needed on the effectiveness of mitigation strategies and other measures to reduce the impact of structural inequalities, to better understand the factors that drive prevalence. This would include an assessment of how these factors combine to predict transmission and how this varies between different areas.