搜索结果：Annals of occupational and environmental medicine

Editorials1 March 1997Systematic Reviews: Critical Links in the Great Chain of EvidenceCynthia D. Mulrow, MD, MSc, Deborah J. Cook, MD, MSc, and Frank Davidoff, MD, EditorCynthia D. Mulrow, MD, MScAudie L. Murphy Memorial Veterans Hospital, San Antonio, TX 78284St. Joseph's Hospital, Hamilton, Ontario L8N 4A6, Canada Annals of Internal Medicine, Philadelphia, PA 19106, Deborah J. Cook, MD, MScAudie L. Murphy Memorial Veterans Hospital, San Antonio, TX 78284St. Joseph's Hospital, Hamilton, Ontario L8N 4A6, Canada Annals of Internal Medicine, Philadelphia, PA 19106, and Frank Davidoff, MD, EditorAudie L. Murphy Memorial Veterans Hospital, San Antonio, TX 78284St. Joseph's Hospital, Hamilton, Ontario L8N 4A6, Canada Annals of Internal Medicine, Philadelphia, PA 19106Author, Article, and Disclosure Informationhttps://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-126-5-199703010-00008 SectionsAboutFull TextPDF ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditEmail Successful clinical decisions, like most human decisions, are complex creatures [1]. In making them, we draw on information from many sources: primary data and patient preferences, our own clinical and personal experience, external rules and constraints, and scientific evidence (Figure 1). The mix of inputs to clinical decisions varies from moment to moment and from day to day, depending on the decision and the decision makers. In general, however, the proportion of scientific evidence in the mix has grown progressively over the past 150 years or so.Figure 1.Factors that enter into clinical decisions.Figure 1. Factors that enter into clinical ...References1. Damasio AR. Descartes' Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain. New York: GP Putnam; 1994. Google Scholar2. Hart PD. Early controlled clinical trials [Letter]. BMJ. 1996; 312:378-9. Google Scholar3. The Cochrane Collaboration. The Cochrane Library. Oxford, United Kingdom: Update Software; 1996 [updated quarterly]. Google Scholar4. Bero L, Rennie D. The Cochrane Collaboration. Preparing, maintaining, and disseminating systematic reviews of the effects of health care. JAMA. 1995; 274:1935-8. Google Scholar5. Mulrow CD. The medical review article: state of the science. Ann Intern Med. 1987; 106:485-8. Google Scholar6. Mulrow CD. Rationale for systematic reviews. In: Chalmers I, Altman DG, eds. Systematic Reviews. London: BMJ; 1995:1-8. Google Scholar7. Chalmers I, Altman DG, eds. Systematic Reviews. London: BMJ; 1995. Google Scholar8. Cook DJ, Mulrow CD, Haynes RB. Systematic reviews: synthesis of best evidence for clinical decisions. Ann Intern Med. 1997; 126:376-80. Google Scholar9. Begg C, Cho M, Eastwood S, Horton R, Moher D, Olkin I, et al. Improving the quality of reporting of randomized, controlled trials. The CONSORT statement. JAMA. 1996; 276:637-9. Google Scholar10. Moher D, Olkin I. Meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials. A concern for standards. JAMA. 1995; 274:1962-3. Google Scholar11. Naylor CD. Grey zones of clinical practice: some limits to evidence-based medicine. Lancet. 1995; 345:840-2. Google Scholar Author, Article, and Disclosure InformationAuthors: Cynthia D. Mulrow, MD, MSc; Deborah J. Cook, MD, MSc; Frank Davidoff, MD, EditorAffiliations: Audie L. Murphy Memorial Veterans Hospital, San Antonio, TX 78284St. Joseph's Hospital, Hamilton, Ontario L8N 4A6, Canada Annals of Internal Medicine, Philadelphia, PA 19106Corresponding Author: Cynthia D. Mulrow, MD, MSc, Audie L. Murphy Veterans Memorial Hospital, 7400 Merton Minter Boulevard, San Antonio, TX 78284.Current Author Addresses: Dr. Mulrow: Audie L. Murphy Veterans Memorial Hospital, 7400 Merton Minter Boulevard, San Antonio, TX 78284. PreviousarticleNextarticle Advertisement FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsSee AlsoSystematic Reviews: Synthesis of Best Evidence for Clinical Decisions Deborah J. Cook , Cynthia D. Mulrow , and R. Brian Haynes Metrics Cited byApplying bibliometric review methods in education: rationale, definitions, analytical techniques, and illustrationsAssessment of spin in abstracts of Endodontic Systematic Reviews with meta‐analyses published between 2010 and 2022. Are we in need of more transparent interpretation of findings?Methodological quality of systematic reviews on Chinese herbal medicine: a methodological surveyDesigning healthier neighbourhoods: a systematic review of the impact of the neighbourhood design on health and wellbeingAre systematic reviews addressing nutrition for cancer prevention trustworthy? A systematic survey of quality and risk of biasReporting of the methodological quality of search strategies in orthodontic quantitative systematic reviewsNon-life insurance cancellation: a systematic quantitative literature reviewWhat is at the Root of Construction 4.0: A Systematic Review of the Recent Research EffortMedicina baseada em evidências: breve aporte histórico sobre marcos conceituais e objetivos práticos do cuidadoThe Potassium Cycle and Its Relationship to Recommendation DevelopmentNon-financial reporting formats in public sector organizations: a structured literature reviewMethodological quality of systematic reviews on treatments for osteoporosis: A cross-sectional studyMethodological Quality of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis on Asthma Treatments. A Cross-Sectional StudyFoundationsReporting quality of Cochrane systematic reviews with Chinese herbal medicinesInfluence of Diabetes on the Survival Rate and Marginal Bone Loss of Dental Implants: An Overview of Systematic ReviewsThe relationship between buildings and health: a systematic reviewCommunication of cancer screening results by letter, telephone or in person: A mixed methods systematic review of the effect on attendee anxiety, understanding and preferencesConducting a Systematic Review: A Practical GuideMethodological quality of systematic reviews on treatments for depression: a cross-sectional studyTactics employed by healthcare providers in Denmark to determine the vaccination needs of asylum-seeking children: a qualitative studyGray literature in systematic reviews on population health in the Middle East and North Africa: protocol of an overview of systematic reviews and evidence mappingA systematic review of team formulation in clinical psychology practice: Definition, implementation, and outcomesConducting a Systematic Review: A Practical GuideConducting a Systematic Review: A Practical GuideUsing systematic review in occupational safety and healthAdvocating Customer and Supplier Portfolios in Supply Chain Research: A Systematic Literature Review and Research AgendaAnalysis of the survival capacity of mutual funds: a systematic review of the literatureMen, Work, and Mental Health: A Systematic Review of Depression in Male-dominated Industries and OccupationsEpidemiological characteristics and methodological quality of meta-analyses on diabetes mellitus treatment: a systematic reviewAssessment of publication bias required improvement in oral health systematic reviewsThe Role of Gender in Adolescents' Social Networks and Alcohol, Tobacco, and Drug Use: A Systematic ReviewInterventions for Age-Related Macular DegenerationBalancing student/trainee learning with the delivery of patient care in the healthcare workplace: a protocol for realist synthesisReviews: Rapid! Rapid! Rapid! …and systematicAutomating Risk of Bias Assessment for Clinical TrialsMarketing dimensions in the prescription pharmaceutical industry: a systematic literature reviewA Systematic Review of the Effectiveness of Prevention Approaches for Fetal Alcohol Spectrum DisorderWie schreibe ich eine gute Übersichtsarbeit?How effective is drug testing as a workplace safety strategy? A systematic review of the evidenceFrom Passively Received Wisdom to Actively Constructed Knowledge: Teaching Systematic Review Skills As a Foundation of Evidence-Based ManagementA crime to be punished or a problem to be solved? Anti-social behaviour orders and young people with mild learning disabilitiesPatient participation, decision-makers and information flow in surgical treatmentEffectiveness of Anti-Psychotics and Related Drugs in the Huntington French-Speaking Group CohortIntersectoral action for health equity: a rapid systematic reviewSystematic reviews showed insufficient evidence for clinical practice in 2004: what about in 2011? The next appeal for the evidence-based medicine ageSystematic Reviews Informing Occupational TherapyIntimate Partner Violence Among Men Who Have Sex With MenAntibiotics vs Appendectomy for Uncomplicated Acute AppendicitisUnderstanding of Statistical Terms Routinely Used in Meta-Analyses: An International Survey among ResearchersInfusion of statistical science in comparative effectiveness researchEfficacy, Effectiveness, and Evidence-Based Dental Decision-Making: Principles and PracticeEffectiveness of interventions to improve the health and housing status of homeless people: a rapid systematic reviewMeta-Analyses in Joint Arthroplasty: A Review of Quantity, Quality, and ImpactHow well are gic product labels related to current systematic review evidence?Can we improve adenoma detection rates? A systematic review of intervention studiesExtent and quality of systematic review evidence related to minimum intervention in dentistry: essential oils, powered toothbrushes, triclosan, xylitolVital Pulp Therapy in Vital Permanent Teeth with Cariously Exposed Pulp: A Systematic ReviewCorrelations With Satisfaction Measures in Men Treated With Phosphodiesterase Inhibitors for Erectile DysfunctionPrognostic indicators in paediatric cochlear implant surgery: a systematic literature reviewApplication of systematic reviews in speech-and-language therapyBody of evidence supporting the clinical use of 3D multisegment foot models: A systematic reviewHow to Write a Rave ReviewThe evolution and utility of the burn specific health scale: A systematic reviewSystematic reviews, systematic error and the acquisition of clinical knowledgeCommunication about environmental health risks: A systematic reviewAudit about Medical Decision: Data Transmission Concerning Patients with Dementia Entering French Nursing Homes Does Not Confirm the DiagnosisEvidence/discovery-based evolving ontology (EDBEO)Systematic Review and its Relationship with Evidence-Based Practice in HealthL'apprentissage de la « médecine fondée sur les preuves » est-il influencé par des facteurs déterminés ? Résultats d'une enquête nationale auprès de 1870 étudiants français en sixième année de médecinePREDICTORS OF MORTALITY IN ADULT PATIENTS WITH VENTILATOR-ASSOCIATED PNEUMONIAA stimulus to define informatics and health information technologyEvidências científicas no controle da dor no período neonatalEvidence-Based MedicineThe reliability of three-dimensional kinematic gait measurements: A systematic reviewNetwork-Level Task and the Design of Whole Networks: Is There a Relationship?Revisões sistemáticas: O que São e para que ServemThe Narrative of 'Evidence Based' Management: A PolemicRebuttal From Dr. TobinMeta-analysis under the spotlight: Focused on a meta-analysis of ventilator weaning*Hylan versus hyaluronic acid for osteoarthritis of the knee: A systematic review and meta-analysisMeasuring the Care of the Patient in ContextPrescription patterns and efficacy of drugs for patients with dementia: physicians' perspective in ItalyPrevention of Central Venous Catheter-Associated Thrombosis: A Meta-analysisHow Quickly Do Systematic Reviews Go Out of Date? A Survival AnalysisKaveh G. Shojania, MD, Margaret Sampson, MLIS, Mohammed T. Ansari, MBBS, MMedSc, MPhil, Jun Ji, MD, MHA, Steve Doucette, MSc, and David Moher, PhDLimited evidence for effects of diet for type 2 diabetes from systematic reviewsEmotional intelligence: a review of the literature with specific focus on empirical and epistemological perspectivesHow quality improvement interventions can address disparities in depressionHow to Read, Interpret, and Understand Evidence-Based Literature StatisticsTrials and Tribulations of Systematic Reviews and Meta-AnalysesDesired Attributes of Evidence Assessments for Evidence-based PracticesSystemic Rheumatoid Vasculitis: A ReviewHow Relevant and Useful Is the Cochrane Library as a Resource for Evidence in Burn Care, Practice, and Management?Evidence-based Practice Management in Cancer Prevention and TreatmentThe reading, writing, and arithmetic of the medical literature, part 3: critical appraisal of primary researchEvidence-Based Medicine and the Challenge of Low Back Pain: Where Are We Now?The reading, writing, and arithmetic of the medical literature, part 1Preoperative education for orthopaedic patients: systematic reviewAntithrombotic therapy in hypertension: a Cochrane Systematic reviewPractitioners As Experts: The Influence of Practicing Oncologists "in-the-Field" on Evidence-Based Guideline DevelopmentA systematic review of the epidemiology of status epilepticusAntiplatelet agents and anticoagulants for hypertensionSurgical patient education: assessing the interventions and exploring the outcomes from experimental and quasiexperimental studies from 1990 to 2003A move by Speech Pathologists towards evidence-based practice: A commentary on ReillyAn Introduction to Systematic ReviewsEpitaph for the Lone Ranger, MD: Adapting continuing medical education to the twenty-first centuryThe systematic review reportAn evidence-based approach to the development of national dietary guidelinesWriting a Review Article for AJRCCMEvidence-based practice in Hong Kong: issues and implications in its establishmentTowards a Methodology for Developing Evidence-Informed Management Knowledge by Means of Systematic ReviewEvidence-based Medicine and Practice Guidelines: Solution or Problem? Part 1. Evidence-based Medicine and Evidence-based SurgeryPromoting Evidence-Based Health Policy, Programming, and Practice for Seniors: Lessons from a National Knowledge Transfer ProjectPosttransplantation DiabetesIs the promise of randomized control trials ("evidence-based medicine") overstated?Treatment of Refractory Status Epilepticus with Pentobarbital, Propofol, or Midazolam: A Systematic ReviewElements of a systematic reviewKey issues in developing antibiotic policies: from an institutional level to Europe-wide. European Study Group on Antibiotic Policy (ESGAP), Subgroup IIISystematic Reviews: The Heart of Evidence-based PracticeSystematic reviews: gatekeepers of nursing knowledgeAntiplatelets agents and anticoagulants for hypertensionThe evolving role of prevention in health careSearching for Evidence about Health Education and Health Behavior InterventionsSystematic reviews of nursing researchA Qualitative Systematic Overview of the Measurement Properties of Functional Walk Tests Used in the Cardiorespiratory DomainEVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINEForschungsintegration und Metaanalysen im Kontext Evidenz-basierter MedizinPhysical Therapy: What About Basic Sciences?Promoting Optimal Antibiotic Therapy for Otitis Media Using Commercially Sponsored Evidence-Based Detailing: A Prospective Controlled TrialAn Association for Patient-Oriented ResearchJules Hirsch, MDInterventional Radiology and the Use of Metal Stents in Nonvascular Clinical Practice: A Systematic OverviewClinical Effectiveness in the National Health Service in ScotlandMeta-analysis in oral health careHow Can Physicians Keep Up-to-Date?Can data-driven benchmarks be used to set the goals of healthy people 2010?Evidence-based medicine: a new paradigm or the Emperor's new clothes?Part II. Evidence-based medicine: A passing fancy or the future of primary care?Broadening the Evidence Base for Evidence-Based GuidelinesThe Role of Information Technology in Disease Management: Supporting Identification and Delivery of Best PracticesShould alpha-interferon be included as standard treatment in multiple myeloma? 1 March 1997Volume 126, Issue 5Page: 389-391KeywordsClinical trialsDecision makingHealth careHospital medicineInformation storage and retrievalInformation technologyMolecular biologyResearch laboratoriesResearch reporting guidelinesSystematic reviews ePublished: 15 August 2000 Issue Published: 1 March 1997 Copyright & PermissionsCopyright © 1997 by American College of Physicians. All Rights Reserved.PDF downloadLoading ...

CONTEXT: The allocation of scarce health care resources requires a knowledge of disease costs. Whereas many studies of a variety of diseases are available, few focus on job-related injuries and illnesses. This article provides estimates of the national costs of occupational injury and illness among civilians in the United States for 2007. METHODS: This study provides estimates of both the incidence of fatal and nonfatal injuries and nonfatal illnesses and the prevalence of fatal diseases as well as both medical and indirect (productivity) costs. To generate the estimates, I combined primary and secondary data sources with parameters from the literature and model assumptions. My primary sources were injury, disease, employment, and inflation data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) as well as costs data from the National Council on Compensation Insurance and the Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project. My secondary sources were the National Academy of Social Insurance, literature estimates of Attributable Fractions (AF) of diseases with occupational components, and national estimates for all health care costs. Critical model assumptions were applied to the underreporting of injuries, wage-replacement rates, and AFs. Total costs were calculated by multiplying the number of cases by the average cost per case. A sensitivity analysis tested for the effects of the most consequential assumptions. Numerous improvements over earlier studies included reliance on BLS data for government workers and ten specific cancer sites rather than only one broad cancer category. FINDINGS: The number of fatal and nonfatal injuries in 2007 was estimated to be more than 5,600 and almost 8,559,000, respectively, at a cost of $6 billion and $186 billion. The number of fatal and nonfatal illnesses was estimated at more than 53,000 and nearly 427,000, respectively, with cost estimates of $46 billion and $12 billion. For injuries and diseases combined, medical cost estimates were $67 billion (27% of the total), and indirect costs were almost $183 billion (73%). Injuries comprised 77 percent of the total, and diseases accounted for 23 percent. The total estimated costs were approximately $250 billion, compared with the inflation-adjusted cost of $217 billion for 1992. CONCLUSIONS: The medical and indirect costs of occupational injuries and illnesses are sizable, at least as large as the cost of cancer. Workers' compensation covers less than 25 percent of these costs, so all members of society share the burden. The contributions of job-related injuries and illnesses to the overall cost of medical care and ill health are greater than generally assumed.

BACKGROUND: This is the second update of a Cochrane Review originally published in 2009. Millions of workers worldwide are exposed to noise levels that increase their risk of hearing disorders. There is uncertainty about the effectiveness of hearing loss prevention interventions. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of non-pharmaceutical interventions for preventing occupational noise exposure or occupational hearing loss compared to no intervention or alternative interventions. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the CENTRAL; PubMed; Embase; CINAHL; Web of Science; BIOSIS Previews; Cambridge Scientific Abstracts; and OSH UPDATE to 3 October 2016. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCT), controlled before-after studies (CBA) and interrupted time-series (ITS) of non-clinical interventions under field conditions among workers to prevent or reduce noise exposure and hearing loss. We also collected uncontrolled case studies of engineering controls about the effect on noise exposure. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed study eligibility and risk of bias and extracted data. We categorised interventions as engineering controls, administrative controls, personal hearing protection devices, and hearing surveillance. MAIN RESULTS: We included 29 studies. One study evaluated legislation to reduce noise exposure in a 12-year time-series analysis but there were no controlled studies on engineering controls for noise exposure. Eleven studies with 3725 participants evaluated effects of personal hearing protection devices and 17 studies with 84,028 participants evaluated effects of hearing loss prevention programmes (HLPPs). Effects on noise exposure Engineering interventions following legislationOne ITS study found that new legislation in the mining industry reduced the median personal noise exposure dose in underground coal mining by 27.7 percentage points (95% confidence interval (CI) -36.1 to -19.3 percentage points) immediately after the implementation of stricter legislation. This roughly translates to a 4.5 dB(A) decrease in noise level. The intervention was associated with a favourable but statistically non-significant downward trend in time of the noise dose of -2.1 percentage points per year (95% CI -4.9 to 0.7, 4 year follow-up, very low-quality evidence). Engineering intervention case studiesWe found 12 studies that described 107 uncontrolled case studies of immediate reductions in noise levels of machinery ranging from 11.1 to 19.7 dB(A) as a result of purchasing new equipment, segregating noise sources or installing panels or curtains around sources. However, the studies lacked long-term follow-up and dose measurements of workers, and we did not use these studies for our conclusions. Hearing protection devicesIn general hearing protection devices reduced noise exposure on average by about 20 dB(A) in one RCT and three CBAs (57 participants, low-quality evidence). Two RCTs showed that, with instructions for insertion, the attenuation of noise by earplugs was 8.59 dB better (95% CI 6.92 dB to 10.25 dB) compared to no instruction (2 RCTs, 140 participants, moderate-quality evidence). Administrative controls: information and noise exposure feedbackOn-site training sessions did not have an effect on personal noise-exposure levels compared to information only in one cluster-RCT after four months' follow-up (mean difference (MD) 0.14 dB; 95% CI -2.66 to 2.38). Another arm of the same study found that personal noise exposure information had no effect on noise levels (MD 0.30 dB(A), 95% CI -2.31 to 2.91) compared to no such information (176 participants, low-quality evidence). Effects on hearing loss Hearing protection devicesIn two studies the authors compared the effect of different devices on temporary threshold shifts at short-term follow-up but reported insufficient data for analysis. In two CBA studies the authors found no difference in hearing loss from noise exposure above 89 dB(A) between muffs and earplugs at long-term follow-up (OR 0.8, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.03 ), very low-quality evidence). Authors of another CBA study found that wearing hearing protection more often resulted in less hearing loss at very long-term follow-up (very low-quality evidence). Combination of interventions: hearing loss prevention programmesOne cluster-RCT found no difference in hearing loss at three- or 16-year follow-up between an intensive HLPP for agricultural students and audiometry only. One CBA study found no reduction of the rate of hearing loss (MD -0.82 dB per year (95% CI -1.86 to 0.22) for a HLPP that provided regular personal noise exposure information compared to a programme without this information.There was very-low-quality evidence in four very long-term studies, that better use of hearing protection devices as part of a HLPP decreased the risk of hearing loss compared to less well used hearing protection in HLPPs (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.69). Other aspects of the HLPP such as training and education of workers or engineering controls did not show a similar effect.In three long-term CBA studies, workers in a HLPP had a statistically non-significant 1.8 dB (95% CI -0.6 to 4.2) greater hearing loss at 4 kHz than non-exposed workers and the confidence interval includes the 4.2 dB which is the level of hearing loss resulting from 5 years of exposure to 85 dB(A). In addition, of three other CBA studies that could not be included in the meta-analysis, two showed an increased risk of hearing loss in spite of the protection of a HLPP compared to non-exposed workers and one CBA did not. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is very low-quality evidence that implementation of stricter legislation can reduce noise levels in workplaces. Controlled studies of other engineering control interventions in the field have not been conducted. There is moderate-quality evidence that training of proper insertion of earplugs significantly reduces noise exposure at short-term follow-up but long-term follow-up is still needed.There is very low-quality evidence that the better use of hearing protection devices as part of HLPPs reduces the risk of hearing loss, whereas for other programme components of HLPPs we did not find such an effect. The absence of conclusive evidence should not be interpreted as evidence of lack of effectiveness. Rather, it means that further research is very likely to have an important impact.

Chromium (Cr) is used in many industries and it is widely distributed in the environment. Exposure to Cr dust has been reported among workers at these industries. Beside its hazardous effects on the lungs, brain injury could be induced, as the absorption of substances through the nasal membrane has been found to provide them a direct delivery to the brain. We investigated the distribution and the effects of Cr in both brain and lung following the intranasal instillation of potassium dichromate (inPDC) in rats. Simultaneously, we used the common intraperitoneal (ipPDC) rat model of acute Cr-toxicity for comparison. Thirty male Wistar rats were randomly allocated into five groups (n = 6); each received a single dose of saline, ipPDC (15 mg/kg), or inPDC in three dose levels: 0.5, 1, or 2 mg/kg. Locomotor activity was assessed before and 24 h after PDC administration, then, the lungs and brain were collected for biochemical, histopathological, and immunohistochemical investigations. Treatment of rats with ipPDC resulted in a recognition of 36% and 31% of the injected dose of Cr in the brain and lung tissues, respectively. In inPDC-treated rats, targeting the brain by Cr was increased in a dose-dependent manner to reach 46% of the instilled dose in the group treated with the highest dose. Moreover, only this high dose of inPDC resulted in a delivery of a significant concentration of Cr, which represented 42% of the instilled dose, to the lungs. The uppermost alteration in the rats locomotor activity as well as in the brain and lung histopathological features and contents of oxidative stress biomarkers, interleukin-1β (IL-1β), phosphorylated protein kinase B (PKB), and cyclooxygenase 2 (COX-2) were observed in the rats treated with inPDC (2 mg/kg). The findings revealed that these toxic manifestations were directly proportional to the delivered concentration of Cr to the tissue. In conclusion, the study showed that a comparably higher concentrations of Cr and more elevated levels of oxidative stress and inflammatory markers were observed in brain and lung tissues of rats subjected to inPDC in a dose that is just 0.13 that of ipPDC dose commonly used in Cr-induced toxicity studies. Therefore, the study suggests a high risk of brain-targeting injury among individuals environmentally or occupationally exposed to Cr dust, even in low doses, and an additional risk of lung injury with higher Cr concentrations. Moreover, the study introduces inPDC (2 mg/kg)-instillation as a new experimental animal model suitable to study the acute brain and lung toxicities induced by intranasal exposure to Cr compounds.

BACKGROUND: In recent years, cleaning has been identified as an occupational risk because of an increased incidence of reported respiratory effects, such as asthma and asthma-like symptoms among cleaning workers. Due to the lack of systematic occupational hygiene analyses and workplace exposure data, it is not clear which cleaning-related exposures induce or aggravate asthma and other respiratory effects. Currently, there is a need for systematic evaluation of cleaning products ingredients and their exposures in the workplace. The objectives of this work were to: a) identify cleaning products' ingredients of concern with respect to respiratory and skin irritation and sensitization; and b) assess the potential for inhalation and dermal exposures to these ingredients during common cleaning tasks. METHODS: We prioritized ingredients of concern in cleaning products commonly used in several hospitals in Massachusetts. Methods included workplace interviews, reviews of product Materials Safety Data Sheets and the scientific literature on adverse health effects to humans, reviews of physico-chemical properties of cleaning ingredients, and occupational hygiene observational analyses. Furthermore, the potential for exposure in the workplace was assessed by conducting qualitative assessment of airborne exposures and semi-quantitative assessment of dermal exposures. RESULTS: Cleaning products used for common cleaning tasks were mixtures of many chemicals, including respiratory and dermal irritants and sensitizers. Examples of ingredients of concern include quaternary ammonium compounds, 2-butoxyethanol, and ethanolamines. Cleaning workers are at risk of acute and chronic inhalation exposures to volatile organic compounds (VOC) vapors and aerosols generated from product spraying, and dermal exposures mostly through hands. CONCLUSION: Cleaning products are mixtures of many chemical ingredients that may impact workers' health through air and dermal exposures. Because cleaning exposures are a function of product formulations and product application procedures, a combination of product evaluation with workplace exposure assessment is critical in developing strategies for protecting workers from cleaning hazards. Our task based assessment methods allowed classification of tasks in different exposure categories, a strategy that can be employed by epidemiological investigations related to cleaning. The methods presented here can be used by occupational and environmental health practitioners to identify intervention strategies.

Much medical research is observational. The reporting of observational studies is often of insufficient quality. Poor reporting hampers the assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of a study and the generalisability of its results. Taking into account empirical evidence and theoretical considerations, a group of methodologists, researchers, and editors developed the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) recommendations to improve the quality of reporting of observational studies. The STROBE Statement consists of a checklist of 22 items, which relate to the title, abstract, introduction, methods, results and discussion sections of articles. Eighteen items are common to cohort studies, case-control studies and cross-sectional studies and four are specific to each of the three study designs. The STROBE Statement provides guidance to authors about how to improve the reporting of observational studies and facilitates critical appraisal and interpretation of studies by reviewers, journal editors and readers. This explanatory and elaboration document is intended to enhance the use, understanding, and dissemination of the STROBE Statement. The meaning and rationale for each checklist item are presented. For each item, one or several published examples and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies and methodological literature are provided. Examples of useful flow diagrams are also included. The STROBE Statement, this document, and the associated Web site (http://www.strobe-statement.org/) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of observational research.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate differences in reported physical activity levels and in perceived environmental and psychosocial correlates of activity between Portuguese and Belgian adults; and to analyse the relative contribution of environmental and psychosocial variables in explaining physical activity within different contexts in Portugal and Belgium. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: One city in Portugal (Oeiras) and one in Belgium (Ghent). SUBJECTS: In total 526 participants, 247 from Portugal and 279 from Belgium, completed the long International Physical Activity Questionnaire and a validated questionnaire on environmental and psychosocial correlates. RESULTS: For the sum of all activities of at least moderate intensity, a significantly higher mean level of activity was found in Belgian adults (P < 0.001). However, comparable percentages of the Belgian (38%) and Portuguese (42%) samples did not meet the recommendation of 30 min per day. The variance explained by environmental factors was lower (1% to 8%) than by psychosocial factors (maximum 42%). Regression analyses showed activity-specific relations with environmental variables which were analogous in both countries. Walking/cycling for transportation and walking for recreation were related to social support from family and/or friends and to walkability and walking facilities in the neighbourhood. Recreational physical activity was mainly determined by social support, self-efficacy, and perceived benefits and barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Activity campaigns addressing psychosocial determinants are needed to encourage leisure-time activity, while a combination of neighbourhood design changes and encouragement of social support in walking is warranted to increase walking in different contexts.

Welcome to Annals of Global Health,Annals of Global Health is a peer-reviewed, fully open access, online journal dedicated to publishing high quality articles dedicated to all aspects of global health. The journal's mission is to advance global health, promote research, and foster the prevention and treatment of disease worldwide. Its goals are to improve the health and well-being of all people, advance health equity, and promote wise stewardship of the earth's environment. The latest journal impact factor is 3.64.Annals of Global Health is supported by the Program for Global Public Health and the Common Good at Boston College. It was founded in 1934 by the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai as the Mount Sinai Journal of Medicine. It is a partner journal of the Consortium of Universities for Global Health. Authors of articles accepted for publication in Annals of Global Health will be asked to pay an Article Publication Charge (APC) to cover publication costs. This charge can normally be sourced from your funder or institution. We are committed to supporting authors from all countries to publish their work in Annals of Global Health regardless of national income level, and to achieve this goal, we waive the Article Publication Charge for manuscripts where all authors are from low-income or lower-middle-income countries (as defined by the World Bank). From time to time, Annals of Global Health publishes Special Collections, a series of articles organized around a common theme in global health. Recent Special Collections have included “Strengthening Women’s Leadership in Global Health”, “Decolonizing Global Health Education”, and “Capacity Building for Global Health Leadership Training”. Global health workers interested in developing a Special Collection are strongly encouraged to contact the Managing Editor in advance to discuss the project.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The aims of the study were to identify content categories of unreasonable and unnecessary illegitimate tasks and to investigate how unreasonable and unnecessary tasks relate to occupational wellbeing. BACKGROUND: Illegitimate tasks are a common stressor among healthcare professionals, and they have been shown to have negative associations with occupational well-being. Despite this evidence, research has not yet uncovered what kinds of tasks healthcare professionals consider illegitimate. DESIGN AND METHOD: The data gathered by means of an online survey consisted of 1024 municipal healthcare organisation employees. A theory-driven qualitative content analysis was used to analyse freely reported illegitimate tasks. For occupational well-being associations, a mixed-methods approach was used (ANCOVA and linear regression analysis). The STROBE statement-checklist for cross-sectional studies was used. RESULTS: Eight content categories were found for illegitimate tasks. For unreasonable tasks, these were (1) tasks outside one's occupational role (78% of all unreasonable tasks), (2) conflicting or unclear demands (9%), (3) tasks with insufficient resources (8%) and (4) tasks with difficult consequences (5%), and for unnecessary tasks, these were (1) impractical or outdated working habits (31% of all unnecessary tasks), (2) tasks related to dysfunctional technology (30%), (3) unnecessary procedures (27%) and (4) tasks related to bureaucratic demands (12%). Unreasonable and unnecessary tasks were associated with higher levels of burnout and lower work engagement and the meaningfulness of work. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support the theory that illegitimate tasks are an occupational stressor with negative effects on burnout, work engagement and meaningfulness of work. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: The study offers insights into the types of tasks health care employees see as illegitimate and highlights the importance of good job design in promoting occupational well-being in health care.

Mercury exists in various chemical forms. The important forms from a toxicological viewpoint are the metallic form, also called the elemental form, the divalent inorganic forms and methylmercury compounds. Elemental (Hg0) mercury has a high vapor pressure and the vapor causes a number of cases of poisoning via inhalation. Classical mercury poisoning is characterized by a triad of signs, namely tremors, erethism and gingivitis. Mercurial erethism, which is characterized by behavioral and personality changes such as extreme shyness, excitability, loss of memory, and insomnia are also observed. Recently, the effects of mercury exposure at levels around 0.05 mg/m3 or lower have been of concern and may include minor renal tubular damage, increased complaints of tiredness, memory disturbance and other symptoms, subclinical finger tremor, abnormal EEG by computerized analysis and impaired performance in neurobehavioral or neuropsychological tests. Abnormal gait, dysarthria, ataxia, deafness and constriction of the visual field are typical of the symptoms of methylmercury poisoning observed in Minamata and Iraqi outbreaks, as well as in occupational methylmercury poisoning cases. Furthermore, an infant born to a mother with excessive methylmercury consumption showed various neurological disturbances and delayed development. Since several populations are believed to be still exposed to methylmercury through the consumption of fish and sea mammals, neurobehavioral deviations in children of these populations have recently been investigated.

Acetylcholinesterase (AChE) is a key enzyme in the nervous system. It terminates nerve impulses by catalysing the hydrolysis of neurotransmitter acetylcholine. As a specific molecular target of organophosphate and carbamate pesticides, acetylcholinesterase activity and its inhibition has been early recognized to be a human biological marker of pesticide poisoning. Measurement of AChE inhibition has been increasingly used in the last two decades as a biomarker of effect on nervous system following exposure to organophosphate and carbamate pesticides in occupational and environmental medicine. The success of this biomarker arises from the fact that it meets a number of characteristics necessary for the successful application of a biological response as biomarker in human biomonitoring: the response is easy to measure, it shows a dose-dependent behavior to pollutant exposure, it is sensitive, and it exhibits a link to health adverse effects. The aim of this work is to review and discuss the recent findings about acetylcholinesterase, including its sensitivity to other pollutants and the expression of different splice variants. These insights open new perspective for the future use of this biomarker in environmental and occupational human health monitoring.

BACKGROUND: The impact of workplace interventions on the outcome of occupational asthma is not well-understood. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of workplace interventions on the outcome of occupational asthma. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE; EMBASE; NIOSHTIC-2; CISDOC and HSELINE up to February 2011. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials, controlled before and after studies and interrupted time series of workplace interventions for occupational asthma. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed study eligibility and trial quality, and extracted data. MAIN RESULTS: We included 21 controlled before and after studies with 1447 participants that reported on 29 comparisons.In 15 studies, removal from exposure was compared with continued exposure. Removal increased the likelihood of reporting absence of symptoms (risk ratio (RR) 21.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) 7.20 to 63.77), improved forced expiratory volume (FEV1 %) (mean difference (MD) 5.52 percentage points, 95% CI 2.99 to 8.06) and decreased non-specific bronchial hyper-reactivity (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.67, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.21).In six studies, reduction of exposure was compared with continued exposure. Reduction increased the likelihood of reporting absence of symptoms (RR 5.35, 95% CI 1.40 to 20.48) but did not affect FEV1 % (MD 1.18 percentage points, 95% CI -2.96 to 5.32).In eight studies, removal from exposure was compared with reduction of exposure. Removal increased the likelihood of reporting absence of symptoms (RR 39.16, 95% CI 7.21 to 212.83) but did not affect FEV1 % (MD 1.16 percentage points, 95% CI -7.51 to 9.84).Two studies reported that the risk of unemployment after removal from exposure was increased compared with reduction of exposure (RR 14.3, 95% CI 2.06 to 99.16). Three studies reported loss of income of about 25% after removal from exposure.Overall the quality of the evidence was very low. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is very low-quality evidence that removal from exposure improves asthma symptoms and lung function compared with continued exposure.Reducing exposure also improves symptoms, but seems not as effective as complete removal.However, removal from exposure is associated with an increased risk of unemployment, whereas reduction of exposure is not. The clinical benefit of removal from exposure or exposure reduction should be balanced against the increased risk of unemployment. We need better studies to identify which interventions intended to reduce exposure give most benefit.

The large-scale adoption of occupational exoskeletons (OEs) will only happen if clear evidence of effectiveness of the devices is available. Performing product-specific field validation studies would allow the stakeholders and decision-makers (e.g., employers, ergonomists, health, and safety departments) to assess OEs' effectiveness in their specific work contexts and with experienced workers, who could further provide useful insights on practical issues related to exoskeleton daily use. This paper reviews present-day scientific methods for assessing the effectiveness of OEs in laboratory and field studies, and presents the vision of the authors on a roadmap that could lead to large-scale adoption of this technology. The analysis of the state-of-the-art shows methodological differences between laboratory and field studies. While the former are more extensively reported in scientific papers, they exhibit limited generalizability of the findings to real-world scenarios. On the contrary, field studies are limited in sample sizes and frequently focused only on subjective metrics. We propose a roadmap to promote large-scale knowledge-based adoption of OEs. It details that the analysis of the costs and benefits of this technology should be communicated to all stakeholders to facilitate informed decision making, so that each stakeholder can develop their specific role regarding this innovation. Large-scale field studies can help identify and monitor the possible side-effects related to exoskeleton use in real work situations, as well as provide a comprehensive scientific knowledge base to support the revision of ergonomics risk-assessment methods, safety standards and regulations, and the definition of guidelines and practices for the selection and use of OEs.

Biomonitoring of human populations exposed to chemical substances that can act as potential mutagens or carcinogens, may enable the detection of damage and early disease prevention. In recent years, the comet assay has become an important tool for assessing DNA damage, both in environmental and occupational exposure contexts. To evidence the role of the comet assay in human biomonitoring, we have analysed original research studies of environmental or occupational exposure that used the comet assay in their assessments, following the PRISMA-ScR method (preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses extension for scoping reviews). Groups of chemicals were designated according to a broad classification, and the results obtained from over 300 original studies (n = 123 on air pollutants, n = 14 on anaesthetics, n = 18 on antineoplastic drugs, n = 57 on heavy metals, n = 59 on pesticides, and n = 49 on solvents) showed overall higher values of DNA strand breaks in the exposed subjects in comparison with the unexposed. In summary, our systematic scoping review strengthens the relevance of the use of the comet assay in assessing DNA damage in human biomonitoring studies.

BACKGROUND: Climate change is set to exacerbate occupational heat strain, the combined effect of environmental and internal heat stress on the body, threatening human health and wellbeing. Therefore, identifying effective, affordable, feasible and sustainable solutions to mitigate the negative effects on worker health and productivity, is an increasingly urgent need. OBJECTIVES: To systematically identify and evaluate methods that mitigate occupational heat strain in order to provide scientific-based guidance for practitioners. METHODS: An umbrella review was conducted in biomedical databases employing the following eligibility criteria: 1) ambient temperatures > 28 °C or hypohydrated participants, 2) healthy adults, 3) reported psychophysiological (thermal comfort, heart rate or core temperature) and/or performance (physical or cognitive) outcomes, 4) written in English, and 5) published before November 6, 2019. A second search for original research articles was performed to identify interventions of relevance but lacking systematic reviews. All identified interventions were independently evaluated by all co-authors on four point scales for effectiveness, cost, feasibility and environmental impact. RESULTS: Following screening, 36 systematic reviews fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The most effective solutions at mitigating occupational heat strain were wearing specialized cooling garments, (physiological) heat acclimation, improving aerobic fitness, cold water immersion, and applying ventilation. Although air-conditioning and cooling garments in ideal settings provide best scores for effectiveness, the limited applicability in certain industrial settings, high economic cost and high environmental impact are drawbacks for these solutions. However, (physiological) acclimatization, planned breaks, shading and optimized clothing properties are attractive alternative solutions when economic and ecological sustainability aspects are included in the overall evaluation. DISCUSSION: Choosing the most effective solution or combinations of methods to mitigate occupational heat strain will be scenario-specific. However, this paper provides a framework for integrating effectiveness, cost, feasibility (indoors and outdoor) and ecologic sustainability to provide occupational health and safety professionals with evidence-based guidelines.

Mercury is a type of hazardous and toxic pollutant that can result in detrimental effects on the environment and human health. This review is aimed at discussing the state-of-the-art progress on the recent developments on the toxicity of mercury and its chemical compounds. More than 210 recent works of literature are covered in this review. It first delineates the types (covering elemental mercury, inorganic mercury compounds, organic mercury compounds), structures, and sources of mercury. It then discusses the pharmacokinetic profile of mercury, molecular mechanisms of mercury toxicity, and clinical manifestation of acute and chronic mercury toxicity to public health. It also elucidates the mercury toxicity to the environment and human health in detail, covering ecotoxicity, neurotoxicity diseases, neurological diseases, genotoxicity and gene regulation, immunogenicity, pregnancy and reproductive system damage, cancer promotion, cardiotoxicity, pulmonary diseases, and renal disease. In order to mitigate the adverse effects of mercury, strategies to overcome mercury toxicity are recommended. Finally, some future perspectives are provided in order to advance this field of research in the future.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficiency of the major bibliographic databases by assessing the percentage of references among the total literature available that can be retrieved from each database. We also evaluated the best database combinations to carry out an exhaustive search. METHODS: BIOSIS, EMBASE, MEDLINE, NIOSH-TIC, and TOXLINE were searched on two topics: allergy to latex and asbestos and mesothelioma, in the title, abstract, or keywords (textwords). This search was performed for the years 1994 and 1995. All the records were classified by journal and author's name and were verified for each record whether or not it was indexed in each database. Statistical analysis was performed with chi 2 test. RESULTS: 777 articles in 510 issues were found. The efficiency of each database (percentage of articles recovered) and of combinations varied between 11% and 63% for one database and between 42% and 86% for a combination of two databases. The reasons why these differences exist between databases, and within a database, between two different subjects or two different years are reported. CONCLUSION: Firstly, it is not advisable to assert that a bibliography is complete when only one database is searched. Secondly, the efficiency of the databases may be quite different. Finally, it is suggested that the best way to be as exhaustive as possible is to search two or more databases-for example, in EMBASE and TOXLINE, or to a lesser extent EMBASE and MEDLINE. This seems to be the best compromise solution between time consumed for searching and efficiency.

Welcome to Annals of Global Health,Annals of Global Health is a peer-reviewed, fully open access, online journal dedicated to publishing high quality articles dedicated to all aspects of global health. The journal's mission is to advance global health, promote research, and foster the prevention and treatment of disease worldwide. Its goals are to improve the health and well-being of all people, advance health equity, and promote wise stewardship of the earth's environment. The latest journal impact factor is 3.64.Annals of Global Health is supported by the Program for Global Public Health and the Common Good at Boston College. It was founded in 1934 by the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai as the Mount Sinai Journal of Medicine. It is a partner journal of the Consortium of Universities for Global Health. Authors of articles accepted for publication in Annals of Global Health will be asked to pay an Article Publication Charge (APC) to cover publication costs. This charge can normally be sourced from your funder or institution. We are committed to supporting authors from all countries to publish their work in Annals of Global Health regardless of national income level, and to achieve this goal, we waive the Article Publication Charge for manuscripts where all authors are from low-income or lower-middle-income countries (as defined by the World Bank). From time to time, Annals of Global Health publishes Special Collections, a series of articles organized around a common theme in global health. Recent Special Collections have included “Strengthening Women’s Leadership in Global Health”, “Decolonizing Global Health Education”, and “Capacity Building for Global Health Leadership Training”. Global health workers interested in developing a Special Collection are strongly encouraged to contact the Managing Editor in advance to discuss the project.