BackgroundWork related Musculoskeletal Disorders (WMSDs) are one of the most common occupational diseases which mainly affects the lower back, neck and upper and lower extremities. The aim of this study was to determine prevalence of WMSDs in nine body regions among Ready Made Garment (RMG) workers in Bangladesh and ergonomics assessment of their exposure to risk factors for the development of WMSDs.MethodsThis cross-sectional study was conducted among 232 RMG employees (male: 46; female: 186; age: >18yrs) from nine RMG factories in Dhaka division during October 2015 to February 2016. Data were collected using a structured questionnaire consist of demographic questions, Nordic Musculoskeletal Questionnaire-Extended (NMQ-E) for WMSDs assessment in nine body regions and Quick Exposure Check (QEC) method for ergonomic assessment. Prevalence of WMSDs for each body region was determined. The association between WMSDs and ergonomic assessment of their exposure to risk factors were also analyzed.ResultsRespondents’ mean age was 31.3 years (SD = 7). Their mean Body Mass Index (BMI) was 23.51 kg/m2 (SD = 3.74). Among 186 female respondents, 46 reported lower back pain (24.7%) and 44 reported neck pain (23.7%). Among 46 male respondents, 10 reported neck pain (21.7%) while 6 reported knee pain (13%). Statistically significant relationship was found between twelve month WMSDs in anatomical region in elbows (p = 0.02), hips (p = 0.01), knees (p = 0.01) and ankle (p = 0.05) with age; upper back (p = 0.001), elbows (p = 0.001), wrists (p = 0.03), hips (p = 0.001) and ankles (p = 0.01) with job experience; hips with BMI (p = 0.03); elbows (p = 0.04) with daily working hour. QEC assessment showed that level of exposure to WMSDs risk was high among 80% of the study population (p<0.003).ConclusionThe study found that lower back and neck were the most affected areas among RMG workers. Moreover, QEC findings warned the level of exposure to WMSDs risks is high and ergonomics intervention along with investigation and change to decrease exposure level is essential. Addressing musculoskeletal risk factors through ergonomic interventions in terms of working space, workers sitting/standing posture, seat and hand position during work and work-rest cycle are encouraged in RMG sector and policy makers.

This article reports the intent to receive a SARS-COV-2 vaccine, its predictors and willingness to pay in Bangladesh. We carried out an online cross-sectional survey of 697 adults from the general population of Bangladesh in January 2021. A structured questionnaire was used to assess vaccination intent. The questionnaire included sociodemographic variables and health belief model constructs which may predict vaccination intent. Among the participants, 26% demonstrated a definite intent, 43% probable intent, 24% probable negative, and 7% a definite negative intention. Multivariable logistic regression analyses suggest an association between definite intent and previous COVID-19 infection (OR: 2.86; 95% CI: 1.71–4.78), perceiving COVID-19 as serious (OR: 1.93; 1.04–3.59), the belief that vaccination would make them feel less worried about catching COVID-19 (OR: 4.42; 2.25–8.68), and concerns about vaccine affordability (OR: 1.51; 1.01–2.25). Individuals afraid of the side effects (OR: 0.34; 0.21–0.53) and those who would take the vaccine if the vaccine were taken by many others (OR: 0.44; 0.29–0.67) are less likely to have a definite intent. A definite negative intent is associated with the concern that the vaccine may not be halal (OR: 2.03; 1.04–3.96). Furthermore, 68.4% are willing to pay for the vaccine. The median amount that they are willing to pay is USD 7.08. The study findings reveal that the definite intent to receive the SARS-CoV-2 vaccination among the general population varies depending on their COVID-19-related health beliefs and no significant association was found with sociodemographic variables.

We examined the intention and predictors of accepting the COVID-19 vaccine in Saudi Arabia. We conducted a nation-wide, cross-sectional online survey between February and March 2021. A total of 1387 people (≥18 years) participated. Only 27.3% adults had a definite and 30.2% had a probable vaccination intent; 26.8% and 15.6% had a probable and definite negative vaccination intent. Older people (≥50 years) (p < 0.01), healthcare workers/professionals (p < 0.001), and those who received flu vaccine (p < 0.001) were more likely to have a positive intent. People from Riyadh were less likely to receive the vaccine (p < 0.05). Among the health belief model constructs, perceived susceptibility to and severity of COVID-19 (p < 0.001), and perceived benefit of the vaccine (p < 0.001) were positively associated with vaccination intent, whereas perceived barriers had a negative association (p < 0.001). Individuals were more likely to receive the vaccine after obtaining complete information (p < 0.001) and when the vaccine uptake would be more common amongst the public (p < 0.001).

Background The current pandemic of COVID-19 impacted the psychological wellbeing of populations globally. Objectives We aimed to examine the extent and identify factors associated with psychological distress, fear of COVID-19 and coping. Methods We conducted a cross-sectional study across 17 countries during Jun-2020 to Jan-2021. Levels of psychological distress (Kessler Psychological Distress Scale), fear of COVID-19 (Fear of COVID-19 Scale), and coping (Brief Resilient Coping Scale) were assessed. Results A total of 8,559 people participated; mean age (±SD) was 33(±13) years, 64% were females and 40% self-identified as frontline workers. More than two-thirds (69%) experienced moderate-to-very high levels of psychological distress, which was 46% in Thailand and 91% in Egypt. A quarter (24%) had high levels of fear of COVID-19, which was as low as 9% in Libya and as high as 38% in Bangladesh. More than half (57%) exhibited medium to high resilient coping; the lowest prevalence (3%) was reported in Australia and the highest (72%) in Syria. Being female (AOR 1.31 [95% CIs 1.09-1.57]), perceived distress due to change of employment status (1.56 [1.29-1.90]), comorbidity with mental health conditions (3.02 [1.20-7.60]) were associated with higher levels of psychological distress and fear. Doctors had higher psychological distress (1.43 [1.04-1.97]), but low levels of fear of COVID-19 (0.55 [0.41-0.76]); nurses had medium to high resilient coping (1.30 [1.03-1.65]). Conclusions The extent of psychological distress, fear of COVID-19 and coping varied by country; however, we identified few higher risk groups who were more vulnerable than others. There is an urgent need to prioritise health and well-being of those people through well-designed intervention that may need to be tailored to meet country specific requirements.