No abstract

Background: Health responses associated with occupational exposures can vary between men and women.Aims: This study reviewed the work injury and disability risks associated with similar types of occupational exposures for men and women within and across occupations.Materials & Methods: A systematic review was undertaken of observational studies published between 2009 and 2019. Studies were required to empirically compare men and women for associations between occupational exposures and work injury or disability outcomes. Included studies were appraised for methodological quality and medium to high rated studies were compared for risk differences between men and women.Results: Of 14,006 records identified, 440 articles were assessed for methodological quality, and 33 medium to high rated studies were included and reviewed. Among all occupations, the association between physical exposures, job demands, noise, and repetitive tasks, and injury risk were stronger among men. The relationship between repetitive tasks and sickness absence was stronger among women. Most studies examining psychological exposures found no risk differences for men and women across occupations. Men were at higher injury risk in certain occupations in primary and secondary industry sectors involving physical exposures and some chemical/ biological exposures. Women were at higher injury risk for the physical demands and repetitive tasks of health care and aluminum production occupations. Conclusion:This review found that men and women can have different work injury and disability risks, both across and within the same occupations, for some physical exposures and to a lesser extent for some chemical and biological exposures. These differences might be a result of occupation-specific task differences.

No abstract

BACKGROUND: Post-traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) can result from occupational exposures and poses a considerable burden to workers, their families, workplaces and to society in general. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to conduct a rapid review of the literature to answer the question: “Which occupations have exposures that may lead to a PTSD diagnosis?” METHODS: A rapid review was conducted in six steps: review question development, literature search, study selection (inclusion/exclusion), study characterization, data extraction, and data synthesis. RESULTS: The search identified 3428 unique references which were reviewed to find 16 relevant studies in 23 articles. The articles revealed associations between PTSD and rescue workers (police, firefighters, etc.), health care professionals, transit drivers, and bank employees which seem well supported by the literature. Some studies also suggest potential associations with PTSD and construction and extraction, electricians, manufacturing, installation, maintenance and repair, transportation and material moving, and clerical workers. CONCLUSIONS: A rapid review of the peer-reviewed scientific literature of PTSD prevalence or treatment suggests many occupations have exposures that could be associated with PTSD. Occupational traumatic events were most often associated with PTSD diagnosis. More research is needed to better understand the association between occupation and PTSD.

Study Design. Retrospective review and literature review. Objective. The aim of this study was to provide an update on The Cochrane Back and Neck (CBN) activities. Summary of Background Data. Low back pain (LBP) affects 80% of people at some time in their lives. CBN Group has been housed in Toronto at the Institute for Work & Health since 1996 and has published 85 reviews and 32 protocols in the Cochrane Library. Methods. Narrative review of CBN publications, impact factor, usage data, and social media impact. Results. In the past 3 years, CBN conducted priority setting with organizations that develop clinical practice guidelines for LBP. CBN editors and associate editors published key methodological articles in the field of back and neck pain research. The methodological quality of CBN reviews has been assessed by external groups in a variety of areas, which found that CBN reviews had higher methodological quality than non-Cochrane reviews. CBN reviews have been included in 35 clinical practice guidelines for back and neck conditions. The 2018 journal impact factor of CBN is 11.154, which is higher than the 2018 impact factor for CDSR (7.755). CBN reviews ranked 4th among 53 Cochrane review groups in terms of Cochrane Library usage data. The most accessed CBN review was “Yoga treatment for chronic non-specific low-back pain” which had 9689 full-text downloads. CBN is active on Twitter with 3958 followers. Conclusion. CBN has published highly utilized systematic reviews and made important methodological contributions to the field of spine research over the past 22 years within Cochrane. Level of Evidence: 4

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract