Explore the vast range of titles available.

A considerably high number of outdoor workers worldwide are constantly exposed for the majority of their working life to solar radiation (SR); this exposure is known to induce various adverse health effects, mainly related to its ultraviolet (UV) component. The skin and the eye are the principal target organs for both acute and long-term exposure. Actinic keratosis, non-melanoma skin cancers, and malignant melanoma are the main long-term adverse skin effects, whereas in the eye pterygium, cataracts, and according to an increasing body of evidence, macular degeneration may be induced. Despite this, SR exposure risk is currently undervalued, if not neglected, as an occupational risk factor for outdoor workers. SR exposure is influenced by various environmental and individual factors, and occupation is one of the most relevant. For a better understanding of this risk and for the development of more effective prevention strategies, one of the main problems is the lack of available and adequate methods to estimate SR worker exposure, especially long-term exposure. The main aims of this review were to provide a comprehensive overview of SR exposure risk of outdoor workers, including the UV exposure levels and the main methods recently proposed for short-term and cumulative exposure, and to provide an update of knowledge on the main adverse eye and skin effects. Finally, we also outline here preventive interventions to reduce occupational risk.

Occupational exposure to solar ultraviolet (UV) radiation is a recognized work-related risk, as is associated with the induction of long-term adverse health effects such as Non-Melanoma Skin Cancers and cataracts. Recent research provided new data suggesting an increased risk of specific forms of malignant melanoma, i.e., Lentigo Maligna Melanoma, for outdoor workers, while the relation of cumulative exposure to solar radiation with ocular diseases, such as uveal melanoma and macular degeneration, is still debated. Nowadays, one of the main focuses of prevention activities is the organization of multicomponent sun safety initiatives, which are proved to be effective, particularly when including technologies that are able to directly interact with individuals, such as phone apps, such as the recently released SunSmart Global UV App. Nevertheless, we should not forget that we are living in an era of profound changes, and phenomena such as climate change and the COVID-19 pandemic have an impact on all aspects of our lives, including how and when we perform, as well as the perception of, outdoor activities. In the future, this may result in possible changes in the scenario of occupational and leisure-time solar radiation exposure-related health risks.

PurposeMacular degeneration is a multi-factorial disease, leading cause of blindness for people over 50 years old in developed countries. To date, the knowledge on possible occupational factors involved in the development of the disease is scant.MethodWe performed a systematic scientific literature search on the association between macular degeneration and occupational risk factors searching the MedLine and Scopus databases.ResultsWe examined 158 articles and, according to the inclusion criteria, 13 peer-reviewed studies evaluating occupational risk factors for macular degeneration or reporting the frequency of the disease in specific groups of workers were included in the review. Ten on thirteen articles evaluated the presence of macular degeneration in workers exposed to solar radiation. Only one study found that non-specific history of occupational chemical exposure was associated with the disease. Two studies showed an association between macular degeneration and the general category of “blue-collar” workers, but they did not identify the specific risk factors involved.ConclusionsTo date few studies have examined occupational risk factors for macular degeneration. Nevertheless, available data indicate that long-term occupational solar radiation exposure, in particular for its blue-light component, is associated with macular degeneration in outdoor workers.

Pterygium is a chronic eye disease: among its recognized risk factors there is long-term exposure to ultraviolet (UV) radiation. The Sun is the main source of UV exposure: according to the World Health Organization, the Population Attributable Fraction of pterygium due to solar radiation (SR) is 42–74%. Outdoor work can deeply influence the eye exposure to solar UV rays, but, despite this, pterygium is currently not adequately considered as a possible occupational disease in this working category, at least in Europe. For this reason, we performed a systematic review of the scientific literature published in the last ten years (2008–2017) considering the role of outdoor work as a risk factor for pterygium, in order to give new support for the prevention of this UV related disease in workers. We identified 29 relevant papers. Our results show that pterygium prevalence highly increased with latitude and mean annual UV index, and outdoor work is one of the most relevant risk factors, as well as age and male sex, both in high risk and in moderate risk World areas considering the environmental UV levels. Accordingly, pterygium occurring in outdoor workers should be considered an occupational disease. Moreover, our findings clearly support the need of further research on more effective prevention of the occupational risk related to long-term solar radiation exposure of the eye.

Objective A consensual definition of occupational burnout is currently lacking. We aimed to harmonize the definition of occupational burnout as a health outcome in medical research and reach a consensus on this definition within the Network on the Coordination and Harmonisation of European Occupational Cohorts (OMEGA-NET). Methods First, we performed a systematic review in MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Embase (January 1990 to August 2018) and a semantic analysis of the available definitions. We used the definitions of burnout and burnout-related concepts from the Systematized Nomenclature of Medicine Clinical Terms (SNOMED-CT) to formulate a consistent harmonized definition of the concept. Second, we sought to obtain the Delphi consensus on the proposed definition. Results We identified 88 unique definitions of burnout and assigned each of them to 1 of the 11 original definitions. The semantic analysis yielded a first proposal, further reformulated according to SNOMED-CT and the panelists` comments as follows: \"In a worker, occupational burnout or occupational physical AND emotional exhaustion state is an exhaustion due to prolonged exposure to work-related problems\". A panel of 50 experts (researchers and healthcare professionals with an interest for occupational burnout) reached consensus on this proposal at the second round of the Delphi, with 82% of experts agreeing on it. Conclusion This study resulted in a harmonized definition of occupational burnout approved by experts from 29 countries within OMEGA-NET. Future research should address the reproducibility of the Delphi consensus in a larger panel of experts, representing more countries, and examine the practicability of the definition.

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is one of the most-used diagnostic imaging methods worldwide. There are ∼50,000 MRI scanners worldwide each of which involves a minimum of five workers from different disciplines who spend their working days around MRI scanners. This review analyzes the state of the art of literature about the several aspects of the occupational exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF) in MRI: regulations, literature studies on biological effects, and health surveillance are addressed here in detail, along with a summary of the main approaches for exposure assessment. The original research papers published from 2013 to 2021 in international peer-reviewed journals, in the English language, are analyzed, together with documents published by legislative bodies. The key points for each topic are identified and described together with useful tips for precise safeguarding of MRI operators, in terms of exposure assessment, studies on biological effects, and health surveillance. Graphical abstract

Introduction: The impact of long-COVID-19 syndrome is rather variable, since it is influenced by several residual confounders. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence of long COVID-19 in healthcare workers (HCWs) from four university hospitals in north-eastern Italy: Trieste, Padua, Verona, and Modena-Reggio Emilia. Methods: During the period June 2022–August 2022, HCWs were surveyed for past COVID-19 infections, medical history, and any acute as well as post-COVID-19 symptoms. The prevalence of long COVID-19 was estimated at 30–60 days or 61+ days since first negative swab following first and second COVID-19 episode. Furthermore, the risk of long COVID-19 was investigated by multivariable logistic regression. Results were expressed as the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) with a 95% confidence interval (95%CI). Results: 5432 HCWs returned a usable questionnaire: 2401 were infected with SARS-CoV-2 at least once, 230 were infected at least twice, and 8 were infected three times. The prevalence of long COVID-19 after a primary COVID-19 infection was 24.0% at 30–60 days versus 16.3% at 61+ days, and 10.5% against 5.5% after the second SARS-CoV-2 event. The most frequent symptoms after a first COVID-19 event were asthenia (30.3%), followed by myalgia (13.7%), cough (12.4%), dyspnea (10.2%), concentration deficit (8.1%), headache (7.3%), and anosmia (6.5%), in decreasing order of prevalence. The risk of long COVID-19 at 30–60 days was significantly higher in HCWs hospitalized for COVID-19 (aOR = 3.34; 95%CI: 1.62; 6.89), those infected with SARS-CoV-2 during the early pandemic waves—namely the Wuhan (aOR = 2.16; 95%CI: 1.14; 4.09) or Alpha (aOR= 2.05; 95%CI: 1.25; 3.38) transmission periods—and progressively increasing with viral shedding time (VST), especially 15+ days (aOR = 3.20; 95%CI: 2.07; 4.94). Further determinants of long COVID-19 at 30–60 days since primary COVID-19 event were female sex (aOR = 1.91; 95%CI: 1.30; 2.80), age >40 years, abnormal BMI, or administrative services (reference category). In contrast, HCWs vaccinated with two doses before their primary infection (aOR = 0.57; 95%CI: 0.34; 0.94), undergraduate students, or postgraduate medical trainees were less likely to experience long COVID-19 at 30–60 days. Apart from pandemic waves, the main determinants of long COVID-19 at 30–60 days were confirmed at 61+ days. Conclusions: The risk of long COVID-19 following primary infection increased with the severity of acute disease and VST, especially during the initial pandemic waves, when more virulent viral strains were circulating, and susceptibility to SARS-CoV-2 was higher since most HCWs had not been infected yet, COVID-19 vaccines were still not available, and/or vaccination coverage was still building up. The risk of long COVID-19 therefore decreased inversely with humoral immunity at the individual level. Nevertheless, the prevalence of long COVID-19 was remarkably lower after SARS-CoV-2 reinfections regardless of vaccination status, suggesting that hybrid humoral immunity did not increase protection against the syndrome compared to immunity mounted by either natural infection or vaccination separately. Since the risk of long COVID-19 is currently low with Omicron and patients who developed the syndrome following SARS-CoV-2 infection in the early pandemic waves tend to return to a state of full health with time, a cost-effective approach to screen post-COVID-19 symptoms during the Omicron time could be restricted to vulnerable individuals developing severe disease and/or with prolonged VST.

Background The prevalence of obesity is increasing all over the world, resulting in a global health emergency. The impact of obesity on the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and symptom severity, especially among high-risk working populations such as health workers, deserves further studies. Methods A multicentric retrospective cohort study was conducted among health workers at four Italian University Hospitals belonging to the ORCHESTRA Project. Data were collected through an online survey, investigating sociodemographic and clinical data, until September 2022. Results The questionnaire was filled out by 5777 health workers. The median age was 46 years old (I–III quartile 20–72) and 75.5% were females. Data on BMI was available for 5470 participants. Overweight and obese subjects amounted to 23.4% and 9.8%, respectively. Naïve health workers were the majority (57.4%). Overweight and obese subjects were at a higher risk of infection only before vaccination with respect to normoweight subjects (RRR = 1.28 (IC 95% 1.01–1.62, p = 0.039) and 1.36 (1.00–1.86, p = 0.047), respectively). Major acute and post-acute COVID-19 symptoms were more common among obese subjects, as compared to those with a normal weight (35.2% vs. 23.5%, and 14.2% vs. 9.3%). BMI did not reduce antibody levels after vaccination. On the contrary, overweight and obese health workers had a significantly higher RGM after the third dose (1.12 and 1.48, respectively; normal weight as reference). Conclusions Overweight and obese subjects are at a higher risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection. However, SARS-CoV-2 vaccination fosters a high antibody response even in these individuals. Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 should be prioritized in subjects with a high BMI, especially in highly exposed workers, such as health workers.

Background/Objectives: This retrospective multicenter study, conducted within the ORCHESTRA Project, investigated SARS-CoV-2 reinfections among 5777 healthcare workers (HCWs) from four University Hospitals (Modena, Verona, Padova and Trieste) in northern Italy, aiming to assess the risk of reinfection and its determinants, comparing the clinical characteristics of reinfections with those of first infections, and examining the impact of preventive measures and vaccination strategies. Methods: HCWs completed an online questionnaire between June and August 2022. The survey collected demographic, occupational, and clinical data, including information on first infections and reinfections. Statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 28.0, through bivariate and multivariate approaches. Results: Response rates were 41.8% for Modena, 39.5% for Verona, 17.9% for Padova, and 17.4% for Trieste. Among the respondents, 4.8% (n = 276) experienced 2 infections and 0.5% (n = 27) reported 3 infections, out of a total of 330 reinfection cases. Additionally, 43.0% (n = 2787) reported only one infection, while 51.5% were never infected. Reinfection rates increased across five study phases (based on the epidemiological context), likely due to the emergence of new SARS-CoV-2 variants. A booster vaccine dose significantly reduced reinfection risk. Higher reinfection risk was found among HCWs aged ≤30 years, those with chronic respiratory diseases, and those working in COVID-19 wards, particularly nurses and allied health professionals. Reinfections were associated with a lower frequency of symptoms both during the period of swab positivity and after a negative swab, as well as with a shorter duration of swab positivity. No significant differences in symptom duration were found between first infections and reinfections. Conclusions: Despite its limitations, the online questionnaire proved a useful tool. Natural infection and vaccination reduced both reinfection risk and symptom severity. Prior infections should be considered in planning vaccination schedules and prioritizing HCWs.