Return to work for healthcare workers with confirmed COVID-19 infection

“…This was in the context of OH services to healthcare workers in the UK. Indeed, a significant number of papers in the OH and COVID-19 literature have pertained to frontline healthcare staff [ 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 ]. However, this description is likely to be apt for OH professionals in most sectors globally as they are involved in assessing, advising, and monitoring those working and aiming to return to work in the midst of this pandemic.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vulnerable Workers and COVID-19: Insights from a Survey of Members of the International Commission for Occupational Health

Tamin

Oluranti

Suraya

et al. 2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The COVID-19 pandemic has negatively impacted on the health and wellbeing of populations directly through infection, as well as through serious societal and economic consequences such as unemployment and underemployment. The consequences could be even more severe for those more vulnerable to the disease, such as the elderly and those with underlying health conditions. Indeed, there is evidence that such vulnerable populations are disproportionately affected in terms of both, their health and the socioeconomic impact. The aim of our study was to determine whether occupational health (OH) professionals thought that the COVID-19 pandemic might further disadvantage any particular group(s) of vulnerable workers globally, and if so, which group(s). A cross-sectional study was carried out with a sample of OH professionals by means of an online questionnaire which was shared via email within the ICOH (International Commission for Occupational Health) community. Data was collected over a period of two weeks in May 2020 and 165 responses from 52 countries were received. In this paper, the responses relating to questions about vulnerable workers are reported and discussed. Globally, our responders felt that those in less secure jobs (precarious employment (79%) and informal work (69%)), or unemployed (63%), were the most at risk of further disadvantage from this pandemic. The majority felt that their governments could act to mitigate these effects. There were suggestions of short-term alleviation such as financial and social support, as well as calls for fundamental reviews of the underlying inequalities that leave populations so vulnerable to a crisis such as COVID-19.

show abstract

“…However, even the parameter of 10 days from symptom onset cannot seem to be the only reference, because the few empirical data available make it difficult to apply these evidences on a large scale, and a case-by-case evaluation is often necessary. 17 …”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“… 16 Probably the best strategy is the one that considers the PCR Ct together with the severity of symptoms, immunocompromised status and, if available, the antibody serological level. 16 , 17 Whereas there is not a “zero risk” approach to this issue, certainly an excessive search for negative PCR tests leads also to waste resources and to a further stress on the healthcare system.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%