Preventive occupational health interventions in the meat processing industry in upper-middle and high-income countries: a systematic review on their effectiveness

Prevalence and risk factors associated with Q fever infection in slaughterhouse workers in Fars province, Iran

OBJECTIVE

Q fever is a main occupational zoonotic disease. Slaughterhouse is one of the most remarkable ways of transmitting the infection from livestock to humans. This study aimed to survey the prevalence of Q fever in slaughterhouse workers in Fars province, Iran, for the first time.

METHODS

Ninety serum samples were collected from slaughterhouse workers and tested to detect Immunoglobulin G (IgG) against Coxiella burnetii using ELISA and indirect immunofluorescence assay (IFA). PCR was also applied to identify C. burnetii DNA in the blood samples.

RESULTS

Q fever seroprevalence was found at 26.7% in ELISA, showing recent infection. This result indicates that Q fever seroprevalence is relatively high in the Fars region. IFA showed a high seroprevalence of total IgG antibodies at 1:64 titer (73.3%) and relatively high IgG at 1:256 titer (40%) against C. burnetii. 2.2% of the workers were recognized as having probable acute Q fever. The IgG II prevalence at 1:64 and 1:256 titers was, respectively, 63.3% and 24.4% positive. The IgG I prevalence at 1:64 and 1:256 titers was also found 33.3% and 22.2% positive, respectively. Molecular prevalence of Q fever was also 8.9%. A significant relationship was found between IgG I seropositivity and longer work experience and employing other livestock-related jobs (animal husbandry and butchery) (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

As such, the high seroprevalence of Q fever among abattoir workers highlights the importance of further comprehensive epidemiological studies, occupational screening programs, and preventive measures for Q fever in high-risk groups. This also warns animal health care organizations about the risk of Q fever infection in livestock in this region.

Structural Discrimination in Pandemic Policy: Essential Protections for Essential Workers

An inordinate number of low wage workers in essential industries are Black, Hispanic, or Latino, immigrants or refugees - groups beset by centuries of discrimination and burdened with disproportionate but preventable harms during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Health and Well-Being of Hispanic/Latino Meatpacking Workers in Nebraska: An Application of the Health Belief Model

BACKGROUND

Meatpacking is dirty, dangerous, and demanding work. In the United States, the industry predominately employs people from racial/ethnic minority backgrounds and immigrants, with 45% of the workforce identifying as Hispanic/Latino. Little is known about how the work environment affects worker engagement in health-promoting activities; however, occupational health professionals are uniquely positioned to advance worker health, safety, and general well-being.

METHODS

Hispanic/Latino meatpacking workers with work-related musculoskeletal pain and active health concerns were recruited to participate in a study to explore health, health behaviors, and the work environment. Five focus groups (N = 28) were conducted in Nebraska between March 2019 and February 2020. Thematic analysis using the Health Belief Model constructs was used to explain workers' health behaviors including utilization of occupational health services at their workplace.

FINDINGS

Workers believed that there was little they could do to prevent and treat health problems. They understood the perceived threat of health problems and the benefits of self-care, but the perceived barriers often outweighed the benefits. The workplace had few prompts to motivate or incentivize self-care both in and outside of work. In addition, workers did not trust the occupational health office and saw few benefits to accessing services. Together, these conditions resulted in low self-efficacy and limited engagement in health-promoting behaviors.

CONCLUSION/APPLICATION TO PRACTICE

Occupational health professionals should promote Total Worker Health and foster trust by providing culturally, linguistically, and literacy appropriate services and by identifying opportunities and reducing barriers for workers to engage in activities to promote their health, safety, and well-being.

Evidence of Workplace Interventions-A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews

Work environment factors are highly correlated with employees' health and well-being. Our aim was to sum up current evidence of health promotion interventions in the workplace, focusing on interventions for the prevention of musculoskeletal disorders, psychological and behavioral disorders as well as interventions for older employees and economic evaluations. We conducted a comprehensive literature search including systematic reviews published from April 2012 to October 2017 in electronic databases and search engines, websites of relevant organizations and institutions. It consisted of simple and specific terms and word combinations related to workplace health promotion based on the search strategy of a previous review. After full-text screening, 74 references met the eligibility criteria. Using the same search strategy, there was a higher proportion of relevant high-quality studies as compared with the earlier review. The heterogeneity of health promotion interventions regarding intervention components, settings and study populations still limits the comparability of studies. Future studies should also address the societal and insurer perspective, including costs to the worker such as lost income and lost time at work of family members due to caregiving activities. To this end, more high-quality evidence is needed.

Is a One Health Approach Utilized for Q Fever Control? A Comprehensive Literature Review

Q fever, a zoonotic disease transmitted from animals to humans, is a significant public health problem with a potential for outbreaks to occur. Q fever prevention strategies should incorporate human, animal, and environmental domains. A One Health approach, which engages cross-sectoral collaboration among multiple stakeholders, may be an appropriate framework and has the underlying principles to control Q fever holistically. To assess whether components of One Health for Q fever prevention and control have been applied, a comprehensive literature review was undertaken. We found 16 studies that had practiced or recommended a One Health approach. Seven emerging themes were identified: Human risk assessment, human and animal serology, integrated human⁻animal surveillance, vaccination for at-risk groups, environmental management, multi-sectoral collaboration, and education and training. Within the multi-sectoral theme, we identified five subthemes: Policy and practice guidelines, information sharing and intelligence exchange, risk communication, joint intervention, and evaluation. One Health practices varied between studies possibly due to differences in intercountry policy, practice, and feasibility. However, the key issue of the need for multi-sectoral collaboration was highlighted across most of the studies. Further research is warranted to explore the barriers and opportunities of adopting a One Health approach in Q fever prevention and control.

Effectiveness and Cost-benefit Evaluation of a Comprehensive Workers' Health Surveillance Program for Sustainable Employability of Meat Processing Workers

Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of a comprehensive workers' health surveillance (WHS) program on aspects of sustainable employability and cost-benefit. Methods A cluster randomized stepped wedge trial was performed in a Dutch meat processing company from february 2012 until march 2015. In total 305 workers participated in the trial. Outcomes were retrieved during a WHS program, by multiple questionnaires, and from company registries. Primary outcomes were sickness absence, work ability, and productivity. Secondary outcomes were health, vitality, and psychosocial workload. Data were analyzed with linear and logistic multilevel models. Cost-benefit analyses from the employer's perspective were performed as well. Results Primary outcomes sickness absence (OR = 1.40), work ability (B = -0.63) and productivity (OR = 0.71) were better in the control condition. Secondary outcomes did not or minimally differ between conditions. Of the 12 secondary outcomes, the only outcome that scored better in the experimental condition was meaning of work (B = 0.18). Controlling for confounders did not or minimally change the results. However, our stepped wedge design did not enable adjustment for confounding in the last two periods of the trial. The WHS program resulted in higher costs for the employer on the short and middle term. Conclusions Primary outcomes did not improve after program implementation and secondary outcomes remained equal after implementation. The program was not cost-beneficial after 1-3 year follow-up. Main limitation that may have contributed to absence of positive effects may be program failure, because interventions were not deployed as intended.