Last data update: May 28, 2024. (Total: 46864 publications since 2009)
Records 1-6 (of 6 Records) |
Query Trace: Luckhaupt Sara E [original query] |
---|
COVID-19 Surveillance and Investigations in Workplaces - Seattle & King County, Washington, June 15-November 15, 2020.
Bonwitt J , Deya RW , Currie DW , Lipton B , Huntington-Frazier M , Sanford SJ , Pallickaparambil AJ , Hood J , Rao AK , Kelly-Reif K , Luckhaupt SE , Pogosjans S , Lindquist S , Duchin J , Kawakami V . MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2021 70 (25) 916-921 Workplace activities involving close contact with coworkers and customers can lead to transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19 (1,2). Information on the approach to and effectiveness of COVID-19 workplace investigations is limited. In May 2020, Public Health - Seattle & King County (PHSKC), King County, Washington established a COVID-19 workplace surveillance and response system to enhance COVID-19 contact tracing and identify outbreaks in workplaces. During June 15-November 15, 2020, a total of 2,881 workplaces in King County reported at least one case of COVID-19. Among 1,305 (45.3%) investigated workplaces,* 524 (40.3%) met the definition of a workplace outbreak.(†) Among 306 (58.4%) workplaces with complete data,(§) an average of 4.4 employee COVID-19 cases(¶) (median = three; range = 1-65) were identified per outbreak, with an average attack rate among employees of 17.5%. PHSKC and the Washington State Department of Health optimized resources by establishing a classification scheme to prioritize workplace investigations as high, medium, or low priority based on workplace features observed to be associated with increased COVID-19 spread and workforce features associated with severe disease outcomes. High-priority investigations were significantly more likely than medium- and low-priority investigations to have two or more cases among employees (p<0.001), two or more cases not previously linked to the workplace (p<0.001), or two or more exposed workplace contacts not previously identified during case interviews (p = 0.002). Prioritization of workplace investigations allowed for the allocation of limited resources to effectively conduct workplace investigations to limit the potential workplace spread of COVID-19. Workplace investigations can also serve as an opportunity to provide guidance on preventing workplace exposures to SARS-CoV-2, facilitate access to vaccines, and strengthen collaborations between public health and businesses. |
Media Reports as a Tool for Timely Monitoring of COVID-19-Related Deaths Among First Responders-United States, April 2020.
Kelly-Reif K , Rinsky JL , Chiu SK , Burrer S , de Perio MA , Trotter AG , Miura SS , Seo JY , Hong R , Friedman L , Hand J , Richardson G , Sokol T , Sparer-Fine EH , Laing J , Oliveri A , McGreevy K , Borjan M , Harduar-Morano L , Luckhaupt SE . Public Health Rep 2021 136 (3) 315-319 We aimed to describe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) deaths among first responders early in the COVID-19 pandemic. We used media reports to gather timely information about COVID-19-related deaths among first responders during March 30-April 30, 2020, and evaluated the sensitivity of media scanning compared with traditional surveillance. We abstracted information about demographic characteristics, occupation, underlying conditions, and exposure source. Twelve of 19 US public health jurisdictions with data on reported deaths provided verification, and 7 jurisdictions reported whether additional deaths had occurred; we calculated the sensitivity of media scanning among these 7 jurisdictions. We identified 97 COVID-19-related first-responder deaths during the study period through media and jurisdiction reports. Participating jurisdictions reported 5 deaths not reported by the media. Sixty-six decedents worked in law enforcement, and 31 decedents worked in fire/emergency medical services. Media reports rarely noted underlying conditions. The media scan sensitivity was 88% (95% CI, 73%-96%) in the subset of 7 jurisdictions. Media reports demonstrated high sensitivity in documenting COVID-19-related deaths among first responders; however, information on risk factors was scarce. Routine collection of data on industry and occupation could improve understanding of COVID-19 morbidity and mortality among all workers. |
Required and Voluntary Occupational Use of Hazard Controls for COVID-19 Prevention in Non-Health Care Workplaces - United States, June 2020.
Billock RM , Groenewold MR , Free H , Haring Sweeney M , Luckhaupt SE . MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2021 70 (7) 250-253 Certain hazard controls, including physical barriers, cloth face masks, and other personal protective equipment (PPE), are recommended to reduce coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) transmission in the workplace (1). Evaluation of occupational hazard control use for COVID-19 prevention can identify inadequately protected workers and opportunities to improve use. CDC's National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health used data from the June 2020 SummerStyles survey to characterize required and voluntary use of COVID-19-related occupational hazard controls among U.S. non-health care workers. A survey-weighted regression model was used to estimate the association between employer provision of hazard controls and voluntary use, and stratum-specific adjusted risk differences (aRDs) among workers reporting household incomes <250% and ≥250% of national poverty thresholds were estimated to assess effect modification by income. Approximately one half (45.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 41.0%-50.3%) of non-health care workers reported use of hazard controls in the workplace, 55.5% (95% CI = 48.8%-62.2%) of whom reported employer requirements to use them. After adjustment for occupational group and proximity to others at work, voluntary use was approximately double, or 22.3 absolute percentage points higher, among workers who were provided hazard controls than among those who were not. This effect was more apparent among lower-income (aRD = 31.0%) than among higher-income workers (aRD = 16.3%). Employers can help protect workers from COVID-19 by requiring and encouraging use of occupational hazard controls and providing hazard controls to employees (1). |
Considerations for Pooled Testing of Employees for SARS-CoV-2.
Schulte PA , Weissman DN , Luckhaupt SE , de Perio MA , Beezhold D , Piacentino JD , Radonovich LJJr , Hearl FJ , Howard J . J Occup Environ Med 2021 63 (1) 1-9 OBJECTIVES: To identify important background information on pooled tested of employees that employers workers, and health authorities should consider. METHODS: This paper is a commentary based on the review by the authors of pertinent literature generally from preprints in medrixiv.org prior to August 2020. RESULTS/CONCLUSIONS: Pooled testing may be particularly useful to employers in communities with low prevalence of COVID-19. It can be used to reduce the number of tests and associated financial costs. For effective and efficient pooled testing employers should consider it as part of a broader, more comprehensive workplace COVID-19 prevention and control program. Pooled testing of asymptomatic employees can prevent transmission of SARS-CoV-2 and help assure employers and customers that employees are not infectious. |
Increases in Health-Related Workplace Absenteeism Among Workers in Essential Critical Infrastructure Occupations During the COVID-19 Pandemic - United States, March-April 2020.
Groenewold MR , Burrer SL , Ahmed F , Uzicanin A , Free H , Luckhaupt SE . MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2020 69 (27) 853-858 During a pandemic, syndromic methods for monitoring illness outside of health care settings, such as tracking absenteeism trends in schools and workplaces, can be useful adjuncts to conventional disease reporting (1,2). Each month, CDC's National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) monitors the prevalence of health-related workplace absenteeism among currently employed full-time workers in the United States, overall and by demographic and occupational subgroups, using data from the Current Population Survey (CPS).* This report describes trends in absenteeism during October 2019-April 2020, including March and April 2020, the period of rapidly accelerating transmission of SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Overall, the prevalence of health-related workplace absenteeism in March and April 2020 were similar to their 5-year baselines. However, compared with occupation-specific baselines, absenteeism among workers in several occupational groups that define or contain essential critical infrastructure workforce(dagger) categories was significantly higher than expected in April. Significant increases in absenteeism were observed in personal care and service( section sign) (includes child care workers and personal care aides); healthcare support( paragraph sign); and production** (includes meat, poultry, and fish processing workers). Although health-related workplace absenteeism remained relatively unchanged or decreased in other groups, the increase in absenteeism among workers in occupational groups less able to avoid exposure to SARS-CoV-2 (3) highlights the potential impact of COVID-19 on the essential critical infrastructure workforce because of the risks and concerns of occupational transmission of SARS-CoV-2. More widespread and complete collection of occupational data in COVID-19 surveillance is required to fully understand workers' occupational risks and inform intervention strategies. Employers should follow available recommendations to protect workers' health. |
Characteristics of Health Care Personnel with COVID-19 - United States, February 12-April 9, 2020.
CDC COVID-19 Response Team , Burrer Sherry L , de Perio Marie A , Hughes Michelle M , Kuhar David T , Luckhaupt Sara E , McDaniel Clinton J , Porter Rachael M , Silk Benjamin , Stuckey Matthew J , Walters Maroya . MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2020 69 (15) 477-481 As of April 9, 2020, the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic had resulted in 1,521,252 cases and 92,798 deaths worldwide, including 459,165 cases and 16,570 deaths in the United States (1,2). Health care personnel (HCP) are essential workers defined as paid and unpaid persons serving in health care settings who have the potential for direct or indirect exposure to patients or infectious materials (3). During February 12-April 9, among 315,531 COVID-19 cases reported to CDC using a standardized form, 49,370 (16%) included data on whether the patient was a health care worker in the United States; including 9,282 (19%) who were identified as HCP. Among HCP patients with data available, the median age was 42 years (interquartile range [IQR] = 32-54 years), 6,603 (73%) were female, and 1,779 (38%) reported at least one underlying health condition. Among HCP patients with data on health care, household, and community exposures, 780 (55%) reported contact with a COVID-19 patient only in health care settings. Although 4,336 (92%) HCP patients reported having at least one symptom among fever, cough, or shortness of breath, the remaining 8% did not report any of these symptoms. Most HCP with COVID-19 (6,760, 90%) were not hospitalized; however, severe outcomes, including 27 deaths, occurred across all age groups; deaths most frequently occurred in HCP aged ≥65 years. These preliminary findings highlight that whether HCP acquire infection at work or in the community, it is necessary to protect the health and safety of this essential national workforce. |
- Page last reviewed:Feb 1, 2024
- Page last updated:May 28, 2024
- Content source:
- Powered by CDC PHGKB Infrastructure