Sort by
Exposure to air pollution and ovarian reserve parameters

Exposure to air pollution is associated with many different health effects, especially cardiovascular and respiratory diseases. Additionally, highly significant links between exposure to air pollution and fertility, particularly male fertility was observed, however the studies regarding exposure to selected air pollutants and female fertility assessed by ovarian reserve are rare. Hence, the main aim of the study was to analyze relationship between exposure to ambient air pollution and ovarian reserve parameters among Polish women. The study population consisted of 511 women, who attended to infertility clinic because of diagnostic purposes. Participants filled in the questionnaire about social-demographic, lifestyle and health factors. Infertility specialists assessed ovarian parameters such as: antral follicle count (AFC) and concentration of hormones: Anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH), follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) and estradiol (E2). The air pollutants level (sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, carbon monoxide, ozone, particulate matters) were obtained via National Environmental Protection Inspectorate database. Significant negative association between PM2,5 and AMH (p = 0.032), as well as AFC (p = 0.044) was observed. Moreover, SO2 concentrations decrease AFC (p = 0.038). The results also suggest that PM10, PM2.5, SO2 exposure on antral follicle count may be more pronounced among women with a female factor infertility diagnosis. Additionally, exposure to PM2.5 and NOx on AFC and AMH was stronger among older women (> 35 years of age). To conclude, the present study found that air pollution could lead to decrease in follicle antral count and Anti-Müllerian hormone level, especially exposure to PM2,5 and SO2 thus the evidence suggest negative impact to ovarian reserve.

Open Access
Relevant
Healthy working in inclusive companies – a study protocol of the GAIN project

BackgroundThe research project GAIN (working healthy in inclusion companies) deals with the topics of health and work in inclusive companies. Due to a great need for research on (occupational) health (e.g. physical and mental health status) and workplace design in companies employing people with disabilities, this project pursues the primary goal of generating information for the development and implementation of health-preserving measures within the framework of occupational health and safety, and risk assessment, for employees with and without impairments in inclusive companies.MethodsWithin the framework of the project, the employees of three inclusive companies will be examined with the help of an interdisciplinary and triangulative approach. Using quantitative and qualitative methods, specific physical workloads and hazards will be investigated by means of baseline screening methods and measurement techniques, specifically among employees with physical disabilities and impairments. In the statistical analysis, descriptive methods will be used to record the current state, while inferential statistical methods will be used to evaluate health maintenance measures. Inferential statistics for continuous data with confidence intervals based on the statistical parametric mapping (SPM) method will also be performed. The significance level will be set at 5%. Qualitative methods will be used to analyse structures and working conditions within the companies, with particular attention to the specific construction of the relationship between work, health and disability.ConclusionsThe structures in inclusion companies must be specifically designed to support and promote the understanding of work and health in relation to the idea of one’s own body, its positioning in space and its performance. These characteristics are to be identified in the course of the project and bundled into best-practice recommendations. Furthermore, it is the aim of the research project to derive recommendations for action at its conclusion and to present further advice for the promotion of health in inclusive companies.

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

ObjectivesTo assess variation in vaccination uptake across occupational groups as a potential explanation for variation in risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection.DesignWe 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.ResultsEstimated 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.ConclusionsVariation 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.

Open Access
Relevant
Neonatal mortality risk of large-for-gestational-age and macrosomic live births in 15 countries, including 115.6 million nationwide linked records, 2000-2020.

We aimed to compare the prevalence and neonatal mortality associated with large for gestational age (LGA) and macrosomia among 115.6 million live births in 15 countries, between 2000 and 2020. Population-based, multi-country study. National healthcare systems. Liveborn infants. We used individual-level data identified for the Vulnerable Newborn Measurement Collaboration. We calculated the prevalence and relative risk (RR) of neonatal mortality among live births born at term + LGA (>90th centile, and also >95th and >97th centiles when the data were available) versus term + appropriate for gestational age (AGA, 10th-90th centiles) and macrosomic (≥4000, ≥4500 and ≥5000 g, regardless of gestational age) versus 2500-3999 g. INTERGROWTH 21st served as the reference population. Prevalence and neonatal mortality risks. Large for gestational age was common (median prevalence 18.2%; interquartile range, IQR, 13.5%-22.0%), and overall was associated with a lower neonatal mortality risk compared with AGA (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.77-0.89). Around one in ten babies were ≥4000 g (median prevalence 9.6% (IQR 6.4%-13.3%), with 1.2% (IQR 0.7%-2.0%) ≥4500 g and with 0.2% (IQR 0.1%-0.2%) ≥5000 g). Overall, macrosomia of ≥4000 g was not associated with increased neonatal mortality risk (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.69-0.94); however, a higher risk was observed for birthweights of ≥4500 g (RR 1.52, 95% CI 1.10-2.11) and ≥5000 g (RR 4.54, 95% CI 2.58-7.99), compared with birthweights of 2500-3999 g, with the highest risk observed in the first 7 days of life. In this population, birthweight of ≥4500 g was the most useful marker for early mortality risk in big babies and could be used to guide clinical management decisions.

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

BackgroundLong-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. MethodsUrine 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. ResultsFrom 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. ConclusionsOur 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.

Relevant
Recognition of COVID-19 with occupational origin: a comparison between European countries

ObjectivesThis study aims to present an overview of the formal recognition of COVID-19 as occupational disease (OD) or injury (OI) across Europe.MethodsA COVID-19 questionnaire was designed by a task group within COST-funded OMEGA-NET and sent to occupational health experts of 37 countries in WHO European region, with a last update in April 2022.ResultsThe questionnaire was filled out by experts from 35 countries. There are large differences between national systems regarding the recognition of OD and OI: 40% of countries have a list system, 57% a mixed system and one country an open system. In most countries, COVID-19 can be recognised as an OD (57%). In four countries, COVID-19 can be recognised as OI (11%) and in seven countries as either OD or OI (20%). In two countries, there is no recognition possible to date. Thirty-two countries (91%) recognise COVID-19 as OD/OI among healthcare workers. Working in certain jobs is considered proof of occupational exposure in 25 countries, contact with a colleague with confirmed infection in 19 countries, and contact with clients with confirmed infection in 21 countries. In most countries (57%), a positive PCR test is considered proof of disease. The three most common compensation benefits for COVID-19 as OI/OD are disability pension, treatment and rehabilitation. Long COVID is included in 26 countries.ConclusionsCOVID-19 can be recognised as OD or OI in 94% of the European countries completing this survey, across different social security and embedded occupational health systems.

Open Access
Relevant
IMP2ART: development of a multi-level programme theory integrating the COM-B model and the iPARIHS framework, to enhance implementation of supported self-management of asthma in primary care

BackgroundSupported asthma self-management, incorporating an asthma action plan and annual clinical review, has been recommended by UK/global guidelines for over three decades. However, implementation remains poor, as only around a third of individuals receive basic asthma care, according to the UKs leading respiratory charity Asthma and Lung UK. A systematic review of implementation studies recommended that a whole systems approach targeting patients, healthcare professional education, and organisations is needed to improve implementation of supported asthma self-management in primary care. The IMPlementing IMProved Asthma self-management as RouTine (IMP2ART) is a national Hybrid-II implementation cluster randomised controlled trial that aims to evaluate such an approach. This paper describes the development of the implementation strategy for IMP2ART with particular focus on the integration of multiple level theories.MethodsThe Medical Research Council design and evaluation of complex interventions framework and the Person-Based Approach to intervention development were used as guidance for stages of strategy development. Specifically, we (i) set up a multidisciplinary team (including practicing and academic clinicians, health psychologists, public health and patient colleagues), (ii) reviewed and integrated evidence and theory, (iii) developed guiding principles, (iv) developed prototype materials, and (v) conducted a pre-pilot study before final refinement.ResultsThe implementation strategy included resources for patients, team-based and individual healthcare professional education, practice audit and feedback, and an asthma review template, as well as a facilitator role accessible to primary care practices for 12 months. The synthesis of the integrated Promoting Action on Research Implementation in Health Services (iPARIHS) and Capability, Opportunity, Motivation and Behaviour (COM-B) frameworks led to an evolved framework bringing together important implementation and behaviour change elements which will be used as a basis for the study process evaluation.ConclusionsA description of rigorous implementation strategy development for the IMP2ART study is provided along with newly theorised integration of implementation and behaviour change science which may be of benefit to others targeting implementation in primary care.Trial registrationISRCTN15448074. Registered on 2nd December 2019.

Open Access
Relevant
Implementing psychological interventions delivered by respiratory professionals for people with COPD. A stakeholder interview study

Implementing psychological interventions in healthcare services requires an understanding of the organisational context. We conducted an interview study with UK National Health Service stakeholders to understand the barriers and facilitators for implementing psychological interventions for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder (COPD). We used TANDEM as an exemplar intervention; a psychological intervention recently evaluated in a randomised controlled trial. Twenty participants providing care and/or services to people with COPD were purposively sampled from NHS primary/secondary care, and commissioning organisations. Participants were recruited via professional networks and referrals. Verbatim transcripts of semi-structured interviews were analysed using thematic analysis. Four themes were identified: (1) Living with COPD and emotional distress affects engagement with physical and psychological services; (2) Resource limitations affects service provision in COPD; (3) Provision of integrated care is important for patient well-being; and (4) Healthcare communication can be an enabler or a barrier to patient engagement. People need support with physical and psychological symptoms inherent with COPD and healthcare should be provided holistically. Respiratory healthcare professionals are considered able to provide psychologically informed approaches, but resources must be available for training, staff supervision and service integration. Communication between professionals is vital for clear understanding of an intervention’s aims and content, to facilitate referrals and uptake. There was widespread commitment to integrating psychological and physical care, and support of respiratory healthcare professionals’ role in delivering psychological interventions but significant barriers to implementation due to concerns around resources and cost efficiency. The current study informs future intervention development and implementation.

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

ObjectiveWe 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. MethodsThe 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). ResultsWe 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. ConclusionsSelf-reported, estimated average biomarker concentrations and measured urinary biomarker exposure measures of glyphosate and mancozeb showed similar exposure–response associations with sleep outcomes.

Open Access
Relevant