Archivos de prevención de riesgos laborales最新文献

Objective: To evaluate metabolic syndrome using three methods proposed by  recognizedinternational institutions, and the visceral adiposity (VAI) and dysfunctional adiposity (DAI) indices for prediction and prevalence estimation in working populations.

Methods: Cross-sectional study in workers from different Spanish autonomous communities who underwent a health examination between January 2019 and September 2021 at four occupational risk prevention services. Metabolic syndrome was evaluated according to criteria from the National Cholesterol Education Program Adult Treatment Panel III (NCEP/ATP-III), the International Diabetes Federation (IDF) and  the Joint Interim Statement (JIS). VAI and DAI values were calculated using their specific formulas and their predictive capacity was measured using ROC curves. The SPSS 27.0 program was used, with statistical significance level set at p< 0.05.

Results: 418 343 workers were included, mostly men (58.8%), average age between 30 and 49 years (58.0%), social class III, mostly manual workers (75.9%) and nonsmokers (66.9%). The prevalence of metabolic syndrome differed  depending on the criteria used, being higher in men with IDF and JIS, and in women with ATPIII. For the three definitions of metabolic syndrome, the values of the area under the curve were > 0.8 (>80%). The highest VAI was obtained with the JIS, and the highest DAI with the ATPIII. The highest confidence index was for ATPIII and JIS.

Conclusions: The VAI and ICD adiposity indices show high predictive capacity in metabolic syndrome with all three criteria used and can be useful for prevention activities in occupational health.

In a context of transition towards the end of the pandemic, we think it is time to recognize COVID-19 as an occupational disease. The steps taken to recognize it as a work accident in health workers represent progress, but it is not enough. It is a step that the European Commission has recently recommended, including it on the European list of occupational diseases, in all those activities with a clear risk of contagious. This would imply objective advantages for workers and companies.

A request is made to include in musculoskeletal disorders the fascia as a structure that can also be affected and the reasons for this proposal are explained.

Objective: To compare the reactogenicity between the types of mRNA Commirnaty® (Pfizer) and Spikevax® (Moderna) vaccines against COVID-19 in a healthcare population.

Methods: Cross sectional study of short-term adverse effects and their consequences (sick leave, limitations of daily life, etc.) after the administration of the first and second doses of both vaccines in professionals and students of a health institution. A questionnaire on symptoms and their consequences was administered seven days after each vaccination dose. The prevalence and 95% confidence interval (95%CI) were calculated. Differences between vaccines were quantified using the odds ratio (OR) and its 95%CI.

Results: The questionnaire was completed by 1924 and 1170 healthcare providers (response rates 62.2% and 39.1%) after the first and second doses, respectively, of the Commirnaty® vaccine, and 410 (56.0%) and 107 (15.0%) of Spikevax®. After the first dose of Comirnaty®, 67.4% presented some adverse effect, and 76.1% for Spikevax® (OR 1.5 95%CI 1.2-1.9). In general, women and young people showed greater reactogenicity and differences between vaccinSpain. Consequences of adverse effects were more frequent for Spikevax®. The reactogenicity was higher after the second than the first dose, for both vaccines (Comirnaty®: 67.4% vs. 75.6%; Spikevax®: 76.1% vs. 87.9%.

Conclusions: The greater reactogenicity and its consequences, for the first and second dose of the Spikevax® vaccine compared to Comirnaty®, and of the second dose compared to the first dose of both vaccines, provides useful knowledge for planning vaccination against COVID-19 campaigns in healthcare settings.