The health and well-being of remote and mobile workers.

BACKGROUND: Remote and mobile workers (RMWs), people who spend the majority of work time away from a home or office base, are estimated to number 1 million in the UK and Ireland. A number of advantages and challenges have been identified with this way of working but little is known about the impact of this type of work on the health and well-being of RMWs. AIMS: To identify any potential health or psychosocial effects associated with remote and mobile working, identify ergonomic factors that impact on this group and ascertain the effect of organizational or management factors that influence this occupational group. METHODS: A systematic review methodology was used and a search strategy developed including keywords, which were used to search electronic databases and websites. Data were then extracted from included papers and quality assessed. RESULTS: Initial searches identified 280 references but only 11 papers reached the inclusion criteria. Health effects identified included musculoskeletal symptoms associated with higher mileage and more time in a vehicle but a number of vehicle design issues were found to improve symptoms. Psychosocial factors including high demands were also found but better mental health was associated with higher mileage and more time with clients. There was a lack of substantive evidence in relation to managing this group. CONCLUSIONS: There is little research currently available on the general health of RMWs and future research should examine this further and focus on general health and access to support services.

Bar workers' health and environmental tobacco smoke exposure (BHETSE): symptomatic improvement in bar staff following smoke-free legislation in Scotland.

OBJECTIVE: To examine changes in the health of bar workers after smoke-free legislation was introduced. DESIGN: Longitudinal study following bar workers from before legislation introduction, at 2 months after introduction and at 1 year to control for seasonal differences. SETTING: Bars across a range of socio-economic settings in Scotland. PARTICIPANTS: 371 bar workers recruited from 72 bars. INTERVENTION: Introduction of smoke-free legislation prohibiting smoking in enclosed public places, including bars. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Change in prevalence of self-reported respiratory and sensory symptoms. RESULTS: Of the 191 (51%) workers seen at 1-year follow-up, the percentage reporting any respiratory symptom fell from 69% to 57% (p = 0.02) and for sensory symptoms from 75% to 64% (p = 0.02) following reductions in exposure, effects being greater at 2 months, probably partly due to seasonal effects. Excluding respondents who reported having a cold at either baseline or 1 year, the reduction in respiratory symptoms was similar although greater for "any" sensory symptom (69% falling to 54%, p = 0.011). For non-smokers (n = 57) the reductions in reported symptoms were significant for phlegm production (32% to 14%, p = 0.011) and red/irritated eyes (44% to 18%, p = 0.001). Wheeze (48% to 31%, p = 0.006) and breathlessness (42% to 29%, p = 0.038) improved significantly in smokers. There was no relationship between change in salivary cotinine levels and change in symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Bar workers in Scotland reported significantly fewer respiratory and sensory symptoms 1 year after their working environment became smoke free. As these improvements, controlled for seasonal variations, were seen in both non-smokers and smokers, smoke-free working environments may have potentially important benefits even for smokers.

Changes in air quality and second-hand smoke exposure in hospitality sector businesses after introduction of the English Smoke-free legislation.

BACKGROUND: To monitor and disseminate the short-term effects of the English Smoke-free legislation on air quality and employee exposure in businesses of the hospitality industry. METHODS: Indoor particle concentrations and salivary cotinine levels were measured in businesses in the hospitality sector and non-smoking employees one month before and after the implementation of the legislation. Results were immediately released to the media to announce the improvements in air quality and employee exposure to the wider public. RESULTS: Measurements were collected in 49 businesses and from 75 non-smoking individuals. Indoor PM(2.5) concentrations decreased by 95% from 217 microg/m(3) at baseline to 11 microg/m(3) at follow-up (P < 0.001). Salivary cotinine in employees was reduced by 75%, from 3.6 ng/ml at baseline to 0.9 ng/ml at follow-up (P < 0.001). The findings were presented to the public through press releases and interviews and were cited in over 20 media articles. CONCLUSION: The project demonstrates the positive effects of the English Smoke-free legislation on air quality and second-hand smoke exposure in the hospitality industry sector. We believe that quick and positive feedback to the public on the effects of smoking restrictions is essential when introducing public health legislation such as the Smoke-free legislation.