Return to work guidelines for the COVID-19 pandemic

Rueda-Garrido, Juan Carlos; Vicente-Herrero, Ma Teófila; Campo, Ma Teresa del; Reinoso-Barbero, Luis; Hoz, Rafael E. de la; Delclos, George L.; Kales, Stefanos N.; Fernández-Montero, Alejandro

doi:10.1093/occmed/kqaa099

Cited by 32 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…As the aforementioned testing strategies improve and workplaces reopen, establishing practices that promote worker safety, maintain jobs and assure confidentiality are essential to protect all workers, including those most vulnerable to infection. Workplace return‐to‐work plans should: (1) assess the risk unique to specific workplaces and jobs 88 ; (2) implement infection protection strategies (described above); and (3) develop evidence‐based policies to identify and isolate individuals with suspected or confirmed infection, while allowing previously infected individuals to return to work after self‐isolation 89 . Employers should consider applicable recommendations for workplace protections and relevant guidance on protecting workers' rights.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

COVID‐19 as an occupational disease

Carlsten

Gulati

Hines

et al. 2021

American J Industrial Med

Self Cite

102

155

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The impact of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 permeates all aspects of society worldwide. Initial medical reports and media coverage have increased awareness of the risk imposed on healthcare workers in particular, during this pandemic. However, the health implications of COVID‐19 for the global workforce are multifaceted and complex, warranting careful reflection and consideration to mitigate the adverse effects on workers worldwide. Accordingly, our review offers a framework for considering this topic, highlighting key issues, with the aim to prompt and inform action, including research, to minimize the occupational hazards imposed by this ongoing challenge. We address respiratory disease as a primary concern, while recognizing the multisystem spectrum of COVID‐19‐related disease and how clinical aspects are interwoven with broader socioeconomic forces.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Return‐to‐work policies need to be stratified according to worker exposure risk levels, 88 which vary by industry and ability to distance and control exposure to infected individuals. They also need to take into account relevant up‐to‐date background disease prevalence and test performance characteristics.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

COVID‐19 as an occupational disease

Carlsten

Gulati

Hines

et al. 2021

American J Industrial Med

Self Cite

102

155

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Protocols have been developed and published to assess the risk factors associated with COVID-19 in workplaces, in many cases targeting health centres ( WHO, 2020b ) although the same organisation has published another protocol for all workers so as to keep workplaces free from contagion ( World Health Organization, 2020c , Goverment of United Kingdom, 2020 ). Guides have also been published to assist physicians in the management of sick leaves and return to work ( Rueda-Garrido et al, 2020 , OSHA ), or in the rehabilitation of workers after overcoming the disease ( Barker-Davies et al, 2020 ), after discovering the importance of not delaying the start of rehabilitation more than 30 days after the acute phase ( NICE, 2017 ). In Spain, decisions for return to work have been affected by the unavailability of tests for the detection of the disease or the logical uncertainty regarding the validity of such tests ( Wang et al, 2020 , Ranka et al, 2020 ), which has forced a permanent review of all protocols and guides following the continuous changes found in scientific evidence.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Health-related factors of psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic among non-health workers in Spain

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Non-health workers engaged in essential activities during the pandemic are less researched on the effects of COVID-19 than health workers. Objective to study the differences between those who work away from home and those who do so from home, when the effects of fear of contagion cross with those of confinement, about the psychological distress during the COVID-19 in Spain. Design Observational descriptive cross-sectional study . Data sources The study was carried out receiving 1089 questionnaires from non-health workers that were working away from home and doing so from their homes. The questionnaire included sociodemographic and occupational data, physical symptoms, self-perceived health, use of preventive measures and possible contacts, and the Goldberg GHQ-12. Results 71.6% of non-health female workers and 52.4% of non-health male workers had psychological distress, with differences among those working away from home and those working from home. The level of psychological distress among non-health workers is predicted by 66.5% through the variables: being a woman, 43 years old or younger, having a home with no outdoor spaces, poor perception of health, number of symptoms, and having been in contact with contaminated people or material. Among workers who work away from home, being self-employed is another predictive variable of distress . Conclusion More than the half of the sample showed inadequate management of the psychological distress. There are modifiable factors which provide necessary elements to support a positive attitude of the workers, such as: knowledge of hygiene, transmission of the virus, protective measures, and social distancing measures.

show abstract

“…Aunque la guía especifica que se requiere realizar un seguimiento cercano de los trabajadores vulnerables, no se especifican más pautas. 71 En las guías de retorno al trabajo de la Occupational Safety and Health Administration se indica que durante las fase 1 y 2 de la pandemia, cuando sea factible, se establezcan adaptaciones especiales basadas en necesidades individuales para aquellos trabajadores con mayor riesgo de enfermedad grave o que tengan miembros en el hogar con mayor riesgo de enfermedad grave. No se establece un criterio distinto al ser portador de la enfermedad.…”

Section: Discusión Y Conclusionesunclassified

Criterios de retorno al trabajo y determinación del valor de vulnerabilidad por Covid-19

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objetivo. Establecer criterios médicos de retorno al trabajo en personal con riesgo de complicaciones por Covid-19. Material y métodos. Se realizó una revisión sistemática para identificar las condiciones y las características clínicas que influyen en el riesgo de desarrollar Covid-19 grave. Resultados. Se ha demostrado incremento del riesgo en obesidad, edad >60 años, diabetes mellitus, hipertensión arterial, enfermedad pulmonar obstructiva crónica, enfermedad cardiovascular, enfermedad renal crónica y cáncer. Solamente en diabetes se ha estudiado si el control previo influye. Se proponen condiciones específicas y el nivel de riesgo epidemiológico para el retorno al trabajo. Conclusiones. El retorno laboral de estos grupos debe priorizarse buscando favorecer el control de la enfermedad, identificando el estado de salud que incrementa el riesgo y protegiendo el derecho al trabajo. Se presentan recomendaciones para guiar la reincorporación al trabajo.

show abstract

Return to work guidelines for the COVID-19 pandemic

Cited by 32 publications

References 7 publications

COVID‐19 as an occupational disease

COVID‐19 as an occupational disease

Health-related factors of psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic among non-health workers in Spain

Criterios de retorno al trabajo y determinación del valor de vulnerabilidad por Covid-19

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About