The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has deeply altered social and working environments in several ways. Social distancing policies, mandatory lockdowns, isolation periods, and anxiety of getting sick, along with the suspension of productive activity, loss of income, and fear of the future, jointly influence the mental health of citizens and workers. Workplace aspects can play a crucial role on moderating or worsening mental health of people facing this pandemic scenario. The purpose of this literature review is to deepen the psychological aspects linked to workplace factors, following the epidemic rise of COVID-19, in order to address upcoming psychological critical issues in the workplaces. We performed a literature search using Google Scholar, PubMed, and Scopus, selecting papers focusing on workers’ psychological problems that can be related to the workplace during the pandemic. Thirty-five articles were included. Mental issues related to the health emergency, such as anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and sleep disorders are more likely to affect healthcare workers, especially those on the frontline, migrant workers, and workers in contact with the public. Job insecurity, long periods of isolation, and uncertainty of the future worsen the psychological condition, especially in younger people and in those with a higher educational background. Multiple organizational and work-related interventions can mitigate this scenario, such as the improvement of workplace infrastructures, the adoption of correct and shared anti-contagion measures, including regular personal protective equipment (PPE) supply, and the implementation of resilience training programs. This review sets the basis for a better understanding of the psychological conditions of workers during the pandemic, integrating individual and social perspectives, and providing insight into possible individual, social, and occupational approaches to this “psychological pandemic”.

The COVID-19 pandemic represents a traumatic event that has profoundly changed working conditions with detrimental consequences for workers’ health, in particular for the healthcare population directly involved in addressing the emergency. Nevertheless, previous research has demonstrated that traumatic experiences can also lead to positive reactions, stimulating resilience and feelings of growth. The aim of this narrative review is to investigate the positive aspects associated with the COVID-19 pandemic and the possible health prevention and promotion strategies by analyzing the available scientific evidence. In particular, we focus on the constructs of resilience, coping strategies and posttraumatic growth (PTG). A literature search was performed on the PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar and Psycinfo databases. Forty-six articles were included in the literature synthesis. Psychological resilience is a fundamental variable for reducing and preventing the negative psychological effects of the pandemic and is associated with lower levels of depression, anxiety and burnout. At the individual and organizational level, resilience plays a crucial role in enhancing wellbeing in healthcare and non-healthcare workers. Connected to resilience, adaptive coping strategies are essential for managing the emergency and work-related stress. Several positive factors influencing resilience have been highlighted in the development of PTG. At the same time, high levels of resilience and positive coping strategies can enhance personal growth. Considering the possible long-term coexistence and consequences of COVID-19, organizational interventions should aim to improve workers’ adaptive coping skills, resilience and PTG in order to promote wellbeing.

Infectious disease control is a crucial public health issue. Although it is important to urgently perform public health measures in order to reduce the risk of spread, it could end up stigmatizing entire groups of people rather than offering control measures based on sound scientific principles. This “us” versus “them” dynamic is common in stigmatization, in general, and indicates a way in which disease stigma can be viewed as a proxy for other types of fears, especially xenophobia and general fear of outsiders. The pandemic risk associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection led us to consider, among other related issues, how stigma and discrimination remain serious barriers to care for people suspected of being infected, even more if they are assisting professions, such as health workers, employed in emergency response. The purpose of this review is to evaluate and promote the importance of psychological aspects of the stigma and social discrimination (SAD) in pandemic realities and, more specifically, nowadays, in the context of SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19. Just as it happened with HIV, HCV, tuberculosis, and Zika, stigma and discrimination undermine the social fabric compromising the ethics and principles of civilization to which each individual in entitled. Recognizing disease stigma history can give us insight into how, exactly, stigmatizing attitudes are formed, and how they are disbanded. Instead of simply blaming the ignorance of people espousing stigmatizing attitudes about certain diseases, we should try to understand precisely how these attitudes are formed so that we can intervene in their dissemination. We should also look at history to see what sorts of interventions against stigma may have worked in the past. Ongoing research into stigma should evaluate what has worked in the past, as above-mentioned, providing us with some clues as to what might work in the current pandemic emergency, to reduce devastating discrimination that keeps people from getting the care they need. We propose a systematic and historical review, in order to create a scientific and solid base for the following SAD analysis. The aim is to propose a coping strategy to face stigma and discrimination (SAD) related to SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19 pandemic outbreak, borrowing coping strategy tools and solutions from other common contagious diseases. Furthermore, our study observes how knowledge, education level, and socioeconomic status (SES) can influence perception of SARS-CoV-2/ COVID-19 risk in a digital world, based on previous research, best practices, and evidence-based research.

With ongoing climate change, which alters the conditions for pathogens and vectors, zoonotic diseases such as monkeypox virus will become a challenge and a great threat impacting global health in future decades. A current outbreak of monkeypox is occurring in over 125 countries, with a report of thousands of cases in countries where this virus has never appeared. Occupational exposure to the monkeypox virus has recently been identified as an issue of major concern for occupational health, especially in healthcare settings. A scoping review following the PRISMA guidelines was performed, aiming to analyze the effects that the current monkeypox outbreak has in workplaces, given the potential exposure of healthcare workers to the virus, the possible spread of the virus in occupational settings, and the preventive measures that are necessary to implement. At the end of the selection process, 21 studies were included in the review. Healthcare workers are considered at a high risk, and similar preventive measures to those adopted during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic must be implemented in all healthcare settings. The main recommendations for preventing and managing monkeypox in occupational settings are the vaccination of exposed workers, the prompt identification and isolation of infected individuals, and good hygiene practices. Education and specific training are necessary in non-endemic countries to make healthcare workers able to recognize the disease and prevent further contagions. Although monkeypox seems unlikely to reach the pandemic spread of COVID-19, an approach to global health even to avoid future zoonotic epidemics is required by all stakeholders.

The spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus has caused crucial changes in the workplace. Almost two years after the start of the COVID-19 era, new and old psychosocial risks in the workplace threaten workers’ mental wellbeing and represent an occupational health challenge. The aim of this review is to identify the most relevant psychosocial factors, negative or protective, contributing to occupational stress during the current pandemic. A literature search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Google Scholar and PsycINFO and a total of 51 articles were deemed suitable for inclusion in the review. Analysis of the retrieved articles revealed five main topics related to psychosocial wellbeing in the workplace: 1. Support from colleagues and organizations; 2. Home–work interface and balance; 3. Changes in workload and work demand; 4. Job competence and appropriate training; 5. Job insecurity and financial stress. All five themes were associated with occupational stress and poor mental outcomes, like anxiety, depression, and burnout symptoms. Peer and organizational support seem to have a major impact on workers’ mental wellbeing. Recognizing these factors and projecting interventions that mitigate their effects or boost their efficacy is a fundamental step towards dealing with COVID-19 in the workplace, or any such future emergencies.

ObjectiveWork-related musculoskeletal disorders (WRMSDs) are considered nowadays the most serious issue in the Occupational Health and Safety field and industrial exoskeletons appear to be a new approach to addressing this medical burden. A systematic review has been carried out to analyze the real-life data of the application of exoskeletons in work settings considering the subjective responses of workers.MethodsThe review was registered on PROSPERO. The literature search and its report have been performed following the PRISMA guidelines. A comprehensive literature search was performed in PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Scopus.ResultsTwenty-four original studies were included in the literature review; 42% of the papers retrieved included automobilist industry workers, 17% of the studies evaluated the use of exoskeletons in logistic facilities, and 17% of articles involved healthcare. The remaining six papers recruited farmers, plasterers, wasting collectors, construction workers, and other workmen. All the papers selected tested the use of passive exoskeletons, supporting upper arms or back. Usability, perceived comfort, perceived exertion and fatigue, acceptability and intention to use, occupational safety and health, and job performance and productivity were the main topic analyzed.ConclusionExoskeletons are not a fix-all technology, neither for workers nor for job tasks; they tend to show more of their potential in static activities, while in dynamic tasks, they can obstacle regular job performance. Comfort and easiness of use are the key factors influencing the user's experience. More research is needed to determine the most effective and safe ways to implement exoskeleton use in occupational settings.Systematic review registrationhttps://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=275728, identifier CRD42021275728.

Introduction. The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic has involved healthcare workers (HCWs) both as caregivers and as patients. This study is a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of the HCWs working in a third-level hospital in Central Italy who were infected with COVID-19 from March 2020 to April 2021. This research aims at identifying the physical and mental health outcomes of HCWs infected with COVID-19 who returned to work after the infection, the determinants of those outcomes, such as age and sex, and the identification of possible vulnerable professional groups. Methods. A questionnaire about the acute illness, the experience of returning to work, and health perceptions after the disease was administered to 427 healthcare workers 3 months after recovering from the SARS-CoV-2 infection. Results. The majority interviewed (84.5%) reported symptoms at the time of the positive test, with no significant differences regarding age or sex, while a significant difference in the mean age was found regarding hospitalization (p < 0.001). At 3 months after the infection, females (p = 0.001), older workers (p < 0.001), and healthcare assistants (p < 0.001) were more likely to report persistent symptoms. Sex (p = 0.02) and age (p = 0.006) influenced the quality of sleep after the infection. At work, the nurses group reported increase in workload (p = 0.03) and worse relationships (p = 0.028). At 3 months after the infection, female workers perceived worse physical (p = 0.002) and mental (p < 0.001) health status according to the SF-12. A negative correlation was found between age and PCS score (p < 0.001) but not MCS score (p = 0.86). A significant difference in PCS score was found between nurses and physicians (p = 0.04) and between residents and all other groups (p < 0.001). Finally, the group of workers reporting sleep alterations showed lower PCS and MCS scores (p < 0.001) and working relationships had an impact on MCS scores (p < 0.001). Conclusions. Age, sex, and type of job had an impact on physical and mental outcomes. Organizing specific interventions, also tailored to professional sub-groups, should be a target for healthcare systems to protect and boost the physical and mental health of their workers.

Agriculture is one of the most hazardous economic sectors, and it accounts for many accidents and occupational diseases every year. In Italy, about one-third of injuries involve the upper extremity, with long-term consequences for the workers and economic damage for agricultural companies and farms. This systematic review describes upper limb injuries among farmworkers, especially hand injuries, and highlights the main dangerous risk factors. Literature review included articles published in the major databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus), using a combination of some relevant keywords. This online search yielded 951 references; after selection, the authors analyzed 53 articles (3 narrative reviews and 50 original articles). From this analysis, it appears that younger male farmers are mostly involved, especially in the harvesting season. The upper limb and hand are often the body parts that sustain most damage as these are mostly involved in driving tractors or tools. The most frequent type of lesions are open wounds, lacerations, fractures, strains, and overexertion lesions. Sometimes, a distracting element (such as mobile phone use, quarrels, working hours load) is present; poor use of protective devices and lack of safety design in tools can also increase the risk of accidents. For these reasons, in the agricultural sector, a system of health promotion and good practices is needed to promote workers’ awareness of the sources of risk, highlight more dangerous situations and apply organizational behavioral measures.