Explore the vast range of titles available.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to construct and evaluate a gender-specific job exposure matrix (JEM) for 27 physical work exposures, based on self-report. METHODS: We constructed a JEM using questionnaire data on current physical exposures from 29 381 male and 35 900 female asymptomatic workers aged 18–69 years in the French CONSTANCES cohort study. We excluded workers with musculoskeletal pain to reduce potential reporting bias. We grouped 27 self-reported physical exposures using the French national job codes and stratified by gender. We compared individual and group-based exposures using the performance indicators Cohen’s kappa (κ), sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operating curve (AUC). RESULTS: JEM validation showed fair-to-moderate agreement (κ 0.21–0.60) for most physical exposures for both genders except for ‘reach behind’ (poor), ‘bend neck’ (poor), ‘finger pinch‘ (poor), standing’ (good), ‘use computer screen’ (good), and ‘use keyboard or scanner’ (good). We found the highest AUC for ‘standing’ (men 0.85/ women 0.87), ‘kneel/squat’ (men 0.80/women 0.81), ‘use computer screen’ (men/women 0.81), and ‘use keyboard or scanner’ (men 0.82/ women 0.84). The AUC was <0.60 for only three exposures: ‘bend neck’ (men 0.58/women 0.57), ‘finger pinch’ (men 0.56/ women 0.55), and ‘reach behind’ (men 0.54/ women 0.51). CONCLUSION: The constructed JEM validation measures were comparable for men and women for all exposures. Further research will examine the predictive ability of this gender-specific JEM for musculoskeletal disorders and the relevance of gender-stratification in this process, knowing accuracy of each exposure.

The recent editorial by Dr Susan Peters \"Although a valuable method in occupational epidemiology, job-exposure matrices are no magic fix\" ably describes the strengths and limitations of job-exposure matrix (JEM) approaches in occupational epidemiology research (1). In addition to their use in research, we would like to add that JEM may also be of use in compensation and surveillance efforts in occupational health. JEM could assist the compensation process by supporting the assessment of relevant exposures related to specific health conditions (2). The potential usefulness of a JEM as a decision tool for compensation of work-related musculoskeletal disorders has been examined (3). Because occupational diseases are often under-recognized, another practical application is using a JEM to screen for occupational exposures as part of health surveillance. Use of JEM to screen for asbestos and wood dust exposure in the clinical setting has shown promising results (4-6). By summarizing multiple exposures at a job level (7), JEM may also assist policy-makers in setting priorities for hazards and controls at work, as well as occupational practitioners to target prevention efforts and direct the conduct of more precise exposure measures to particular jobs. Sharing JEM across different countries may be useful in providing estimates of exposures across larger populations to calculate global burden of disease related to occupational exposure. The JEMINI (JEM InterNatIonal) initiative was launched to explore the possibility of developing international JEM that could be used across countries (8). Beginning with physical (biomechanical) exposures, this open group has started homogenizing job coding systems and comparing some available JEM. Estimating differences in the level of exposure between countries will require much more work, without guaranteed success. As Peters mentioned, many limitations exist in the use of JEM. Users of JEM must consider the source of exposure data - expert assessments, data collected from individual workers, or environmental sampling. The coding of occupations is time consuming and can introduce error (9), and more testing of and comparison with automated job coding systems is needed (10). JEM reflect an \"average\" level of exposure within a job at the expense of individual variation. At population level, JEM can offer a useful estimate of exposures. If used at an individual level in a clinical or compensation setting, JEM cannot replace the professionals involved in exposure assessment but may help them focus their action more effectively on complex situations that require their expertise. In conclusion, these JEM developed for research might also be used as a public health tool, provided that their limitations are properly taken into account. References 1. Peters S. Although a valuable method in occupational epidemiology, job-exposure matrices are no magic fix. Scand J Work Environ Health 2020;46:2314. https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.3894 2. Kerbrat J, Descatha A. (The recognition of health consequences of difficult working conditions in France and its evaluation with the use of a job-exposure matrix). Arch Mal Prof Environ. 2018;79:493500. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.admp.2017.12.001 3. Fadel M, Valter R, Quignette A, Descatha A. Usefulness of a job-exposure matrix « MADE » as a decision tool for compensation of work-related musculoskeletal disorders. Eur J Public Health 2019;29:86870. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/cky274 4. Lorentz E, Despreaux T, Quignette A, Chinet T, Descatha A. (Screening of occupational exposure to asbestos and silica by job-exposure matrix among patients with lung cancer and mesothelioma). Rev Mal Respir. 2019;36:108895. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmr.2019.08.006 5. Imbernon E, Goldberg M, Spyckerell Y, Steinmetz J, Bonenfant S, Fournier B. (Use of a job-exposure matrix for the screening of occupational exposure to asbestos). Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique 2004;52:717. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0398-7620(04)99018-9 6. Carton M, Bonnaud S, Nachtigal M, Serrano A, Carole C, Bonenfant S, et al. Post-retirement surveillance of workers exposed to asbestos or wood dust: first results of the French national SPIRALE Program. Epidemiol Prev. 2011;35:31523. 7. Guéguen A, Goldberg M, Bonenfant S, Martin JC. Using a representative sample of workers for constructing the SUMEX French general population based job-exposure matrix. Occup Environ Med. 2004;61:58693. https://doi.org/10.1136/oem.2003.010660 8. Descatha A, Evanoff BA, Andersen JH, Fadel M, Ngabirano L, Leclerc A, et al. JEMINI (Job Exposure Matrix InterNatIonal) Initiative: a Utopian Possibility for Helping Occupational Exposure Assessment All Around the World? J Occup Environ Med. 2019;61:e3201. https://doi.org/10.1097/JOM.0000000000001631 9. Petersen SB, Flachs EM, Svendsen SW, Marott JL, Budtz-Jørgensen E, Hansen J, et al. Influence of errors in job codes on job exposure matrix-based exposure assessment in the register-based occupational cohort DOC*X. Scand J Work Environ Health 2020;46:25967. https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.3857 10. Buckner-Petty S, Dale AM, Evanoff BA. Efficiency of autocoding programs for converting job descriptors into standard occupational classification (SOC) codes. Am J Ind Med. 2019;62:5968. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.22928.The recent editorial by Dr Susan Peters \"Although a valuable method in occupational epidemiology, job-exposure matrices are no magic fix\" ably describes the strengths and limitations of job-exposure matrix (JEM) approaches in occupational epidemiology research (1). In addition to their use in research, we would like to add that JEM may also be of use in compensation and surveillance efforts in occupational health. JEM could assist the compensation process by supporting the assessment of relevant exposures related to specific health conditions (2). The potential usefulness of a JEM as a decision tool for compensation of work-related musculoskeletal disorders has been examined (3). Because occupational diseases are often under-recognized, another practical application is using a JEM to screen for occupational exposures as part of health surveillance. Use of JEM to screen for asbestos and wood dust exposure in the clinical setting has shown promising results (4-6). By summarizing multiple exposures at a job level (7), JEM may also assist policy-makers in setting priorities for hazards and controls at work, as well as occupational practitioners to target prevention efforts and direct the conduct of more precise exposure measures to particular jobs. Sharing JEM across different countries may be useful in providing estimates of exposures across larger populations to calculate global burden of disease related to occupational exposure. The JEMINI (JEM InterNatIonal) initiative was launched to explore the possibility of developing international JEM that could be used across countries (8). Beginning with physical (biomechanical) exposures, this open group has started homogenizing job coding systems and comparing some available JEM. Estimating differences in the level of exposure between countries will require much more work, without guaranteed success. As Peters mentioned, many limitations exist in the use of JEM. Users of JEM must consider the source of exposure data - expert assessments, data collected from individual workers, or environmental sampling. The coding of occupations is time consuming and can introduce error (9), and more testing of and comparison with automated job coding systems is needed (10). JEM reflect an \"average\" level of exposure within a job at the expense of individual variation. At population level, JEM can offer a useful estimate of exposures. If used at an individual level in a clinical or compensation setting, JEM cannot replace the professionals involved in exposure assessment but may help them focus their action more effectively on complex situations that require their expertise. In conclusion, these JEM developed for research might also be used as a public health tool, provided that their limitations are properly taken into account. References 1. Peters S. Although a valuable method in occupational epidemiology, job-exposure matrices are no magic fix. Scand J Work Environ Health 2020;46:2314. https://doi.org/10.5271/sjweh.3894 2. Kerbrat J, Descatha A. (The recognition of health consequences of difficult working conditions in France and its evaluation with the use of a job-exposure matrix). Arch Mal Prof Environ. 2018;79:493500. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.admp.2017.12.001 3. Fadel M, Valter R, Quignette A, Descatha A. Usefulness of a job-exposure matrix « MADE » as a decision tool for compensation of work-related musculoskeletal disorders. Eur J Public Health 2019;29:86870. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/cky274 4. Lorentz E, Despreaux T, Quignette A, Chinet T, Descatha A. (Screening of occupational exposure to asbestos and silica by job-exposure matrix among patients with lung cancer and mesothelioma). Rev Mal Respir. 2019;36:108895. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmr.2019.08.006 5. Imbernon E, Goldberg M, Spyckerell Y, Steinmetz J, Bonenfant S, Fournier B. (Use of a job-exposure matrix for the screening of occupational exposure to asbestos). Rev Epidemiol Sante Publique 2004;52:717. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0398-7620(04)99018-9 6. Carton M, Bonnaud S, Nachtigal M, Serrano A, Carole C, Bonenfant S, et al. Post-retirement surveillance of workers exposed to asbestos or wood dust: first results of the French national SPIRALE Program. Epidemiol Prev. 2011;35:31523. 7. Guéguen A, Goldberg M, Bonenfant S, Martin JC. Using a representative sample of workers for constructing the SUMEX French general population based job-exposure matrix. Occup Environ Med. 2004;61:58693. https://doi.org/10.1136/oem.2003.010660 8. Descatha A, Evanoff BA, Andersen JH, Fadel M, Ngabirano L, Leclerc A, et al. JEMINI (Job Exposure Matrix InterNatIonal) Initiative: a Utopian Possibility for Helping Occ

Background In view of the conflicting opinions published, a meta-analysis was undertaken on epidemiological studies in order to assess any association between Dupuytren's contracture and work exposure. Methods Using the key words: \"occupational disease\", \"work\" and \"Dupuytren contracture\" without limitation on language or year of publication, epidemiological studies were selected from four databases (Pub-Med, Embase, Web of science, BDSP) after two rounds (valid control group, valid work exposure). A quality assessment list was constructed and used to isolate papers with high quality methodological criteria (scores of 13 or above, HQMC). Relevant associations between manual work, vibration exposure (at work) and Dupuytren's contracture were extracted from the articles and a metarisk calculated using the generic variance approach (meta-odds ratios, meta-OR). Results From 1951 to 2007, 14 epidemiological studies (including 2 cohort studies, 3 case-control studies, and 9 cross-sectional studies/population surveys) were included. Two different results could be extracted from five studies (based on different types of exposure), leading to 19 results, 12 for manual work (9 studies), and 7 for vibration exposure (5 studies). Six studies met the HQMC, yielding 9 results, 5 for manual work and 4 for vibration exposure. Five studies found a dose-response relationship. The meta-OR for manual work was 2.02[1.57;2.60] (HQMC studies only: 2.01[1.51;2.66]), and the meta-OR for vibration exposure was 2.88 [1.36;6.07] (HQMC studies only: 2.14[1.59;2.88]). Conclusion These results support the hypothesis of an association between high levels of work exposure (manual work and vibration exposure) and Dupuytren's contracture in certain cases.

ObjectiveCold environments are a potential risk factor for stroke. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between performing work tasks in cold environments and the occurrence of a first stroke event.MethodsFrom the French population-based cohort CONSTANCES (‘Cohorte des consultants des Centres d'examens de santé’ in French), we collected data from baseline questionnaires along with medical interviews on cardiovascular risk factors and reported exposure to cold temperatures (<10°C) at work. Exposures were categorised as rare (<2 hours/day), often (≥2 and <4 hours/day) and almost always (≥4 hours/day). Incidence of stroke was retrieved from the French National Health database. Bivariate and multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess the association between working in cold environments and the incidence of stroke. Stratified analyses on stroke types were also conducted.ResultsThere were 160 782 participants and 224 strokes (168 ischaemic and 76 haemorrhagic) included in our study. No significant increase in stroke was found for working in cold environments; the adjusted OR for often or almost always exposed was 1.14 (95% CI 0.46 to 2.84).ConclusionsThis study did not reveal a significant excess risk of stroke for occupational exposures to low temperatures. Further studies are needed to better assess the effect of preventive measures and very low temperature on occurrence of cardiovascular diseases.

Background The musculoskeletal disorders in working population represent one of the most worrying work-related health issues at the present time and although the very great majority of available data on the subject focus on musculoskeletal disorders defined by anatomical site, a growing number of studies indicate the low prevalence of disorders strictly confined to a specific anatomical site. The objective of this study was to describe the prevalence and characteristics of multisite musculoskeletal symptoms (multisite MS) in a large French working population. Methods This study was performed on surveillance data of the cross-sectional survey (2002–2005) conducted by a network of occupational physicians in the working population of the Loire Valley region (from 20 to 59 years old). Data concerning MS were collected in the waiting room of the occupational physicians by means of the self-administrated standardized NORDIC questionnaire. Results The study population comprised 3,710 workers (2,162 men (58%) and 1,548 women (42%)) with a mean age of 38.4 years (standard deviation: 10.4 years). The prevalence of MS during the past 12 months was 83.8% with 95% confidence interval of [82.8-85.3] for men and 83.9% [82.0-85.7] for women. The prevalence of subacute MS (lasting at least 30 days) over the past 12 months was 32.8% [30.9-34.8] for men and 37.3% [34.9-39.7] for women. Two-thirds of workers reported MS in more than one anatomical site and about 20% reported MS lasting at least 30 days in more than one anatomical site. The anatomical sites most frequently associated with other MS were the upper back, hip, elbow and neck. The majority of these multisite MS were widespread, involving at least two of the three anatomical regions (upper limb, axial region and lower limb). Conclusions The frequency and extent of multisite MS reported by workers are considerable. Further research must be conducted in this field in order to provide a better understanding of the characteristics and determinants of these multisite MS.

Objectives The aim of this study was to assess the effects of personal and work-related factors on the incidence of rotator cuff syndrome (RCS) in a large working population. Methods A total of 3710 French workers were included in a cross-sectional study in 2002—2005. All completed a self-administered questionnaire about personal factors and work exposure. Using a standardized physical examination, occupational physicians established a diagnosis of RCS. Between 2007—2010, 1611 workers were re-examined. Associations between RCS and risk factors at baseline were analyzed by logistic regression. Results A total of 839 men and 617 women without RCS at baseline were eligible for analysis. RCS was diagnosed in 51 men (6.1%) and 45 women (7.3%). The risk of RCS increased with age for both genders [odds ratio (OR) 4.7 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 2.2—10.0) for men aged 45—49 years and 5.4 (95% CI 2.3—13.2) for women aged 50—59 years; reference <40 years]. For men, the work-related risk factors were repeated posture with the arms above the shoulder level combined with high perceived physical exertion [OR 3.3 (95% CI 1.3—8.4)] and low coworker support [OR 2.0 (95% CI 1.1—3.9)]. For women, working with colleagues in temporary employment [OR 2.2 (95% CI 1.2—4.2)] and repeated arm abduction (60—90°) [OR 2.6 (95% CI 1.4—5.0)] were associated with RCS. Conclusions Age was the strongest predictor for incident cases of RCS, and arm abduction was the major work-related risk factor for both genders. Lack of social support was a predictor for RCS among men.

Little is known about the effect of retirement on alcohol consumption. The objectives were to examine changes in alcohol consumption following retirement, and whether these patterns differ by gender and socioeconomic status. We assessed alcohol consumption annually from 5 years before to 5 years after retirement among 10,023 men and 2,361 women of the French Gazel study. Data were analyzed separately for men and women, using repeated-measures logistic regression analysis with generalized estimating equations. Five years prior to retirement, the prevalence of heavy drinking was about 16% among men, and not patterned by socioeconomic status. Among women, this prevalence was 19.5% in managers, 14.7% in intermediate occupations, and 12.8% in clerical workers. Around retirement, the estimated prevalence of heavy drinking increased in both sexes. In men, this increase was 3.1 percentage points for managers, 3.2 in intermediate occupations, 4.6 in clerical workers, and 1.3 in manual workers. In women, this increase was 6.6 percentage points among managers, 4.3 in intermediate occupations, and 3.3 among clerical workers. In men the increase around retirement was followed by a decrease over the following four years, not significant among manual workers; among women such a decrease was also observed in the non-managerial occupations. It is difficult to assess the extent to which the results observed in this cohort would hold for other working populations, other conditions of employment, or in other cultural settings. A plausible explanation for the increase in heavy drinking around retirement could be that increased leisure time after retirement provides more opportunities for drinking, and not having to work during the day after may decrease constraints on drinking. Our findings of increased consumption around retirement suggest that information about negative effects of alcohol consumption should be included in pre-retirement planning programs.

Objectives This study aims to estimate the association between repeated measures of occupational risk factors and the incidence of lateral epicondylitis in a large working population. Methods A total of 3710 workers in a French region were included in 2002—2005, and among them 1046 had a complete follow-up in 2007—2010. At both stages, occupational health physicians assessed the presence of lateral epicondylitis and workers self-reported their occupational exposures. Poisson models were performed to assess the incidence rate ratios (IRR) separately by sex using multiple imputed data. Results The annual incidence rate of lateral epicondylitis was estimated as 1.0 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.7—1.3] per 100 workers among men and 0.9 (95% CI 0.6—1.3) among women. Workers aged >45 years had higher incidence than those aged <30 years (significant at 10%). Among men, high physical exertion combined with elbow flexion/extension or extreme wrist bending (>2 hours/day) was a risk factor, with an age-adjusted IRR of 3.2 (95% CI 1.5—6.4) for workers exposed at both questionnaires [3.3 (95% CI 1.4—7.6) among women]. Conclusions This study highlights the importance of temporal dimensions for occupational risk factors on the incidence of lateral epicondylitis. Further research should evaluate the risk associated with the duration and repetition of occupational exposure on the incidence of lateral epicondylitis.

Objectives The study aimed at comparing results of standardized Nordic-style questionnaires with those of clinical examinations in two surveys on upper-limb work-related musculoskeletal disorders. Methods The \"repetitive task\" survey (1757 workers in 1993-1994 and 598 workers in 1996-1997) studied risk factors of the disorders among those exposed to repetitive work. The \"Pays de la Loire\" survey (2685 workers in 2002-2003) was part of a population-wide surveillance system. In both surveys, each worker completed a Nordicstyle questionnaire and underwent a standardized clinical examination. The presence of at least one upper-limb work-related musculoskeletal disorder was compared, with an evaluation of sensitivity, specificity, and kappa values, with a clinical examination as reference. In the second survey, a global score of a numerical scale for the severity of symptoms at the time of the examination was evaluated in the same way (plus ROC curves). Results Agreement between the questionnaire and the examination differed in the two surveys, from kappa 0.22 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 0.19-0.23] in the \"Pays de la Loire\" survey to kappa 0.77 (95% CI 0.74-0.80) in the \"repetitive task\" survey in 1993-1994. Overall, sensitivity was excellent (82.3-100%). The specificity varied, from 51.1% in the \"Pays de la Loire\" survey to 82.4% for the > 2 score based on the severity of symptoms in the survey. Conclusions Nordic-style questionnaires exploring symptoms in the past year can be useful tools for monitoring upper-limb work-related musculoskeletal disorders, especially if they include numerical rating scales of symptom severity. Physical examination remains essential for a medical or clinical diagnosis.

Objective Rotator cuff syndrome (RCS) is a major health problem among workers. The aim of the study was to examine the risk factors for RCS among workers exposed to various levels of shoulder constraints. Methods From 3710 workers, representative of a French region's working population, trained occupational physicians diagnosed a total of 142 cases of RCS among men and 132 among women between 2002–2005. Diagnoses were established by standardized physical examination while personal factors and work exposure were assessed by self-administered questionnaires. Statistical associations between RCS and personal and work-related factors were analyzed for each gender using logistic regression modeling. Results The personal risk factors for RCS were age [odds ratio (OR) for 1-year increment 1.07, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.05–1.09, among men and 1.08, 95% CI 1.06–1.10, among women] and diabetes mellitus (OR 2.9, 95% CI 1.0–8.6, among women). The work-related risk factors were (i) sustained or repeated arm abduction (≥2 hours/day) >90° among men (OR 2.3, 95% CI 1.3–3.9) and >60° among women (OR 1.8, 95% CI 1.0–3.2) or both conditions among men (OR 2.0, 95% CI 1.1–3.7) and women (OR 3.6, 95% CI 1.8–7.3); (ii) high repetitiveness of the task (≥4 hours/day) among men (OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.0–2.4) and women (OR 1.7, 95% CI 1.1–2.5); (iii) high perceived physical demand among men (OR 2.0, 95% CI 1.3–3.1); (iv) high psychological demand among men (OR 1.7, 95% CI 1.2–2.5); and (v) low decision authority among women (OR 1.5, 95% CI 1.0–2.3). Conclusion Personal (ie, age) and work-related physical (ie, arm abduction) and psychosocial factors were associated with RCS for both genders in this working population.