Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Between 2001 and 2010, five research groups conducted coordinated prospective studies of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) incidence among US workers from various industries and collected detailed subject-level exposure information with follow-up of symptoms, electrophysiological measures and job changes. Objective This analysis examined the associations between workplace biomechanical factors and incidence of dominant-hand CTS, adjusting for personal risk factors. Methods 2474 participants, without CTS or possible polyneuropathy at enrolment, were followed up to 6.5 years (5102 person-years). Individual workplace exposure measures of the dominant hand were collected for each task and included force, repetition, duty cycle and posture. Task exposures were combined across the workweek using time-weighted averaging to estimate job-level exposures. CTS case-criteria were based on symptoms and results of electrophysiological testing. HRs were estimated using Cox proportional hazard models. Results After adjustment for covariates, analyst (HR=2.17; 95% CI 1.38 to 3.43) and worker (HR=2.08; 95% CI 1.31 to 3.39) estimated peak hand force, forceful repetition rate (HR=1.84; 95% CI 1.19 to 2.86) and per cent time spent (eg, duty cycle) in forceful hand exertions (HR=2.05; 95% CI 1.34 to 3.15) were associated with increased risk of incident CTS. Associations were not observed between total hand repetition rate, per cent duration of all hand exertions, or wrist posture and incident CTS. Conclusions In this prospective multicentre study of production and service workers, measures of exposure to forceful hand exertion were associated with incident CTS after controlling for important covariates. These findings may influence the design of workplace safety programmes for preventing work-related CTS.

Background Low back pain (LBP) is a common and costly problem throughout the United States. To achieve a greater understanding of the occupational risk factors, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) funded a low back health effects consortium, which performed several surveillance studies throughout the United States. This study combines data from the consortium research groups resulting in a data set with nearly 2000 workers in various regions of the country. The purpose of this paper is to examine prevalence and personal risk factors of low back health effects among these workers. Methods There were three common questions regarding history of low back health effects in the past 12 months including 1) have you had LBP lasting 7 days, 2) have you sought medical care for LBP, and 3) have you taken time off work due to LBP. The questionnaire included demographic questions. There were five data collections institutions or sites including NIOSH, Ohio State University, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Texas A&M University, and University of Utah. Results The 12-month period prevalence of low back pain lasting 7 days, seeking medical care, and lost time due to LBP were 25, 14 and 10%, respectively. There were no statistically significant differences in gender, age or weight between cases and non-cases for any prevalence measure. The height of workers was significantly greater in the cases compared to non-cases for all three prevalence definitions. There were significant differences among the sites on the prevalence of seeking medical care for LBP and lost time due to LBP. The Ohio State University had significantly higher prevalence rates for seeking medical care and lost time due to LBP than University of Wisconsin, University of Utah, or Texas A&M University. Conclusion LBP, the least severe low back health effect studied, had the highest prevalence (25%) and lost time due to LBP, the most severe low back health effect studied, had the lowest prevalence (10%) among nearly 2000 US manual material handling workers. There was a significant site or regional influence in prevalence rates for seeking medical care and lost time due to LBP.

In a cohort of essential workers in the United States previously infected with SARS-CoV-2, risk factors for reinfection included being unvaccinated, infrequent mask use, time since first infection, and being non-Hispanic Black. Protecting workers from reinfection requires a multipronged approach including up-to-date vaccination, mask use as recommended, and reduction in underlying health disparities.

Background Between 2001 and 2010, six research groups conducted coordinated multiyear, prospective studies of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS) incidence in US workers from various industries and collected detailed subject-level exposure information with follow-up symptom, physical examination, electrophysiological measures and job changes. Objective This analysis of the pooled cohort examined the incidence of dominant-hand CTS in relation to demographic characteristics and estimated associations with occupational psychosocial factors and years worked, adjusting for confounding by personal risk factors. Methods 3515 participants, without baseline CTS, were followed-up to 7 years. Case criteria included symptoms and an electrodiagnostic study consistent with CTS. Adjusted HRs were estimated in Cox proportional hazard models. Workplace biomechanical factors were collected but not evaluated in this analysis. Results Women were at elevated risk for CTS (HR=1.30; 95% CI 0.98 to 1.72), and the incidence of CTS increased linearly with both age and body mass index (BMI) over most of the observed range. High job strain increased risk (HR=1.86; 95% CI 1.11 to 3.14), and social support was protective (HR=0.54; 95% CI 0.31 to 0.95). There was an inverse relationship with years worked among recent hires with the highest incidence in the first 3.5 years of work (HR=3.08; 95% CI 1.55 to 6.12). Conclusions Personal factors associated with an increased risk of developing CTS were BMI, age and being a woman. Workplace risk factors were high job strain, while social support was protective. The inverse relationship between CTS incidence and years worked among recent hires suggests the presence of a healthy worker survivor effect in the cohort.

The BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) mRNA COVID-19 vaccine was recommended by CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices for persons aged 12-15 years (referred to as adolescents in this report) on May 12, 2021, and for children aged 5-11 years on November 2, 2021 (1-4). Real-world data on vaccine effectiveness (VE) in these age groups are needed, especially because when the B.1.1.529 (Omicron) variant became predominant in the United States in December 2021, early investigations of VE demonstrated a decline in protection against symptomatic infection for adolescents aged 12-15 years and adults* (5). The PROTECT prospective cohort of 1,364 children and adolescents aged 5-15 years was tested weekly for SARS-CoV-2, irrespective of symptoms, and upon COVID-19-associated illness during July 25, 2021-February 12, 2022. Among unvaccinated participants (i.e., those who had received no COVID-19 vaccine doses) with any laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, those with B.1.617.2 (Delta) variant infections were more likely to report COVID-19 symptoms (66%) than were those with Omicron infections (49%). Among fully vaccinated children aged 5-11 years, VE against any symptomatic and asymptomatic Omicron infection 14-82 days (the longest interval after dose 2 in this age group) after receipt of dose 2 of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine was 31% (95% CI = 9%-48%), adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics, health information, frequency of social contact, mask use, location, and local virus circulation. Among adolescents aged 12-15 years, adjusted VE 14-149 days after dose 2 was 87% (95% CI = 49%-97%) against symptomatic and asymptomatic Delta infection and 59% (95% CI = 22%-79%) against Omicron infection. Fully vaccinated participants with Omicron infection spent an average of one half day less sick in bed than did unvaccinated participants with Omicron infection. All eligible children and adolescents should remain up to date with recommended COVID-19 vaccinations.

Background Low Back Pain (LBP) is a common and costly problem, with variation in prevalence. Epidemiological reports of rating of pain intensity and location within the low back area are rare. The objective is to describe LBP in a large, multi-center, occupational cohort detailing both point and 1-month period prevalence of LBP by location and intensity measures at baseline. Methods In this cross-sectional report from a prospective cohort study, 828 participants were workers enrolled from 30 facilities performing a variety of manual material handling tasks. All participants underwent a structured interview detailing pain rating and location. Symptoms in the lower extremities, demographic and other data were collected. Body mass indices were measured. Outcomes are pain rating (0–10) in five defined lumbar back areas (i) LBP in the past month and (ii) LBP on the day of enrollment. Pain ratings were reported on a 0–10 scale and subsequently collapsed with ratings of 1–3, 4–6 and 7–10 classified as low, medium and high respectively. Results 172 (20.8%) and 364 (44.0%) of the 828 participants reported pain on the day of enrollment or within the past month, respectively. The most common area of LBP was in the immediate paraspinal area with 130 (75.6%) participants with point prevalence LBP and 278 (77.4%) with 1-month period prevalence reported having LBP in the immediate paraspinal area. Among those 364 reporting 1-month period prevalence pain, ratings varied widely with 116 (31.9%) reporting ratings classified as low, 170 (46.7%) medium and 78 (21.4%) providing high pain ratings in any location. Among the 278 reporting 1-month period prevalence pain in the immediate paraspinal area, 89 (32.0%) reported ratings classified as low, 129 (46.4%), medium and 60 (21.6%) high pain ratings. Conclusions Pain ratings varied widely, however less variability was seen in pain location, with immediate paraspinal region being the most common. Variations may suggest different etiological factors related to LBP. Aggregation of different locations of pain or different intensities of pain into one binary classification of LBP may result in loss of information which may potentially be useful in prevention or treatment of LBP.

Background Glenohumeral pain and rotator cuff tendinopathy (RCT) are common musculoskeletal complaints with high prevalence among working populations. The primary proposed pathophysiologic mechanisms are sub-acromial RC tendon impingement and reduced tendon blood flow. Some sleep postures may increase subacromial pressure, potentially contributing to these postulated mechanisms. This study uses a large population of workers to investigate whether there is an association between preferred sleeping position and prevalence of: (1) shoulder pain, and (2) rotator cuff tendinopathy. Methods A cross-sectional analysis was performed on baseline data from a multicenter prospective cohort study. Participants were 761 workers who were evaluated by questionnaire using a body diagram to determine the presence of glenohumeral pain within 30 days prior to enrollment. The questionnaire also assessed primary and secondary preferred sleep position(s) using 6 labeled diagrams. All workers underwent a structured physical examination to determine whether RCT was present. For this study, the case definition of RCT was glenohumeral pain plus at least one of a positive supraspinatus test, painful arc and/or Neer’s test. Prevalence of glenohumeral pain and RCT were individually calculated for the primary and secondary sleep postures and odds ratios were calculated. Results Age, sex, Framingham cardiovascular risk score and BMI had significant associations with glenohumeral pain. For rotator cuff tendinopathy, increasing age, Framingham risk score and Hand Activity Level (HAL) showed significant associations. The sleep position anticipated to have the highest risk of glenohumeral pain and RCT was paradoxically associated with a decreased prevalence of glenohumeral pain and also trended toward being protective for RCT. Multivariable logistic regression showed no further significant associations. Conclusion This cross-sectional study unexpectedly found a reduced association between one sleep posture and glenohumeral pain. This cross-sectional study may be potentially confounded, by participants who are prone to glenohumeral pain and RCT may have learned to avoid sleeping in the predisposing position. Longitudinal studies are needed to further evaluate a possible association between glenohumeral pain or RCT and sleep posture as a potential risk factor.

Objective This paper aimed to quantify exposure-response relationships between the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists' (ACGIH) threshold limit value (TLV) for hand-activity level (HAL) and incidence of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). Methods Manufacturing and service workers previously studied by six research institutions had their data combined and re-analyzed. CTS cases were defined by symptoms and abnormal nerve conduction. Hazard ratios (HR) were calculated using proportional hazards regression after adjusting for age, gender, body mass index, and CTS predisposing conditions. Results The longitudinal study comprised 2751 incident-eligible workers, followed prospectively for up to 6.4 years and contributing 6243 person-years of data. Associations were found between CTS and TLV for HAL both as a continuous variable [HR 1.32 per unit, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.11-1.57] and when categorized using the ACGIH action limit (AL) and TLV. Those between the AL and TLV and above the TLV had HR of 1.7 (95% CI 1.2-2.5) and 1.5 (95% CI 1.0-2.1), respectively. As independent variables (in the same adjusted model) the HR for peak force (PF) and HAL were 1.14 per unit (95% CI 1.05-1.25), and 1.04 per unit (95% CI 0.93-1.15), respectively. Conclusion Those with exposures above the AL were at increased risk of CTS, but there was no further increase in risk for workers above the TLV. This suggests that the current AL may not be sufficiently protective of workers. Combinations of PF and HAL are useful for predicting risk of CTS.

IntroductionFirefighters face frequent physical and psychosocial stressors, increasing their risk for hypertension. Rising call volumes with a stable workforce have heightened occupational burdens. To meet their occupational demands while increasing time off-duty, fire departments across the country have switched from a 24 hours on 48 hours off (termed ‘24/48’) work schedule to one that increases the number of consecutive days off (eg, 1 day on, 3 days off, 2 days on, 3 days off (termed ‘1/3/2/3’) or 48 hours on 96 hours off (termed ‘48/96’)). However, these schedule changes come at the expense of increasing time on-duty, which may have negative health and safety consequences. This paper provides the framework and methods to investigate how these schedules (24/48, 1/3/2/3 and 48/96) impact hypertension risk, well-being and safety among firefighters.Methods and analysisThis quasi-experimental study assesses hypertension risk (primary outcome) markers, including 48-hour ambulatory blood pressure and safety (secondary outcome) using the psychomotor vigilance test and incidence of injuries. The study encompasses a cross-sectional analysis that examines three distinct schedules (24/48, 1/3/2/3 and 48/96) and a prospective analysis, capitalising on a pre-planned schedule transition from a 24/48 to a 1/3/2/3, as a natural experiment without any intervention from the study team. Additionally, the mediating role of sleep (assessed objectively using actigraphy and subjectively using questionnaires) and daily stress in the relationship between work schedule and hypertension risk or sustained attention is investigated to inform both mechanisms and general considerations for developing and promoting a healthy work design for firefighters. The feasibility and acceptability of the three schedules are assessed using validated surveys and qualitative interviews.Ethics and disseminationThe study received approval from the institutional review boards of Oregon Health & Science University (IRB# 20553) and the University of Utah (IRB#165866) and engages fire departments in the Pacific Northwest and Utah. It leverages community engagement with these fire departments, offering an exceptional opportunity to examine the physical and mental impacts of firefighters’ work schedules. Aggregate findings will be disseminated through practical resources, benefiting both regional and national firefighting communities.

This paper aimed to quantify exposure-response relationships between the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists' (ACGIH) threshold limit value (TLV) for hand-activity level (HAL) and incidence of carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). Manufacturing and service workers previously studied by six research institutions had their data combined and re-analyzed. CTS cases were defined by symptoms and abnormal nerve conduction. Hazard ratios (HR) were calculated using proportional hazards regression after adjusting for age, gender, body mass index, and CTS predisposing conditions. The longitudinal study comprised 2751 incident-eligible workers, followed prospectively for up to 6.4 years and contributing 6243 person-years of data. Associations were found between CTS and TLV for HAL both as a continuous variable [HR 1.32 per unit, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.11-1.57] and when categorized using the ACGIH action limit (AL) and TLV. Those between the AL and TLV and above the TLV had HR of 1.7 (95% CI 1.2-2.5) and 1.5 (95% CI 1.0-2.1), respectively. As independent variables (in the same adjusted model) the HR for peak force (PF) and HAL were 1.14 per unit (95% CI 1.05-1.25), and 1.04 per unit (95% CI 0.93-1.15), respectively. Those with exposures above the AL were at increased risk of CTS, but there was no further increase in risk for workers above the TLV. This suggests that the current AL may not be sufficiently protective of workers. Combinations of PF and HAL are useful for predicting risk of CTS.