E-cone: nieuw instrument bij behandeling van de reumatische hand

De Universiteit Twente, het bedrijf SanEcon (een spin-off bedrijf van het AMC) en Reade (voorheen Jan van Breemen Instituut) hebben recentelijk in een samenwerkingsverband een nieuw meetinstrument ontwikkeld: “De E-cone‿. De E-cone visualiseert de drukverdeling over de hand tijdens grijpen, door middel van een op een conus aangebrachte matrix van druksensoren. De door de sensoren gemeten handdrukverdeling, wordt zichtbaar gemaakt op een beeldscherm met behulp van een kleurcodering. Op basis van de weergegeven kleurcodering krijgt de patiënt directe visuele feedback over de gemeten handdruk. In dit artikel willen we meer vertellen over de eerste bevindingen van het gebruik van de E-cone bij de behandeling van patiënten met reumatoïde artritis (RA) en handartrose binnen Reade

Information and feedback to improve occupational physicians’ reporting of occupational diseases: a randomised controlled trial

To assess the effectiveness of supplying occupational physicians (OPs) with targeted and stage-matched information or with feedback on reporting occupational diseases to the national registry in the Netherlands. In a randomized controlled design, 1076 OPs were divided into three groups based on previous reporting behaviour: precontemplators not considering reporting, contemplators considering reporting and actioners reporting occupational diseases. Precontemplators and contemplators were randomly assigned to receive stage-matched, stage-mismatched or general information. Actioners were randomly assigned to receive personalized or standardized feedback upon notification. Outcome measures were the number of OPs reporting and the number of reported occupational diseases in a 180-day period before and after the intervention. Precontemplators were significantly more male and self-employed compared to contemplators and actioners. There was no significant effect of stage-matched information versus stage-mismatched or general information on the percentage of reporting OPs and on the mean number of notifications in each group. Receiving any information affected reporting more in contemplators than in precontemplators. The mean number of notifications in actioners increased more after personalized feedback than after standardized feedback, but the difference was not significant. This study supports the concept that contemplators are more susceptible to receiving information but could not confirm an effect of stage-matching this information on reporting occupational diseases to the national registr

Review on the validity of self-report to assess work-related diseases

Self-report is an efficient and accepted means of assessing population characteristics, risk factors, and diseases. Little is known on the validity of self-reported work-related illness as an indicator of the presence of a work-related disease. This study reviews the evidence on (1) the validity of workers' self-reported illness and (2) on the validity of workers' self-assessed work relatedness of an illness. A systematic literature search was conducted in four databases (Medline, Embase, PsycINFO and OSH-Update). Two reviewers independently performed the article selection and data extraction. The methodological quality of the studies was evaluated, levels of agreement and predictive values were rated against predefined criteria, and sources of heterogeneity were explored. In 32 studies, workers' self-reports of health conditions were compared with the "reference standard" of expert opinion. We found that agreement was mainly low to moderate. Self-assessed work relatedness of a health condition was examined in only four studies, showing low-to-moderate agreement with expert assessment. The health condition, type of questionnaire, and the case definitions for both self-report and reference standards influence the results of validation studies. Workers' self-reported illness may provide valuable information on the presence of disease, although the generalizability of the findings is limited primarily to musculoskeletal and skin disorders. For case finding in a population at risk, e.g., an active workers' health surveillance program, a sensitive symptom questionnaire with a follow-up by a medical examination may be the best choice. Evidence on the validity of self-assessed work relatedness of a health condition is scarce. Adding well-developed questions to a specific medical diagnosis exploring the relationship between symptoms and work may be a good strateg

Interventions to increase the reporting of occupational diseases by physicians : a Cochrane systematic review

Background: Under-reporting of occupational diseases is an important issue in many countries. We conducted a Cochrane systematic review to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions aimed at increasing the reporting of occupational diseases by physicians. Methods: We searched the Cochrane Occupational Safety and Health Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, OSH UPDATE, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), Open-SIGLE, and Health Evidence up to January 2015. We intended to include randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster-RCTs, controlled before-after (CBA) studies, and interrupted time series (ITS) of the effects of increasing the reporting of occupational diseases by physicians. The results of similar studies were combined in a meta-analysis. Results: We included seven RCTs and five CBA studies. Six studies evaluated the effectiveness of educational materials alone, one study evaluated educational meetings, four studies evaluated a combination of the two, and one study evaluated a multifaceted educational campaign for increasing the reporting of occupational diseases by physicians. There was moderate-quality evidence from two studies that the use of a personally addressed electronic newsletter describing the pros and cons of reporting occupational diseases did not increase the number of physicians reporting occupational diseases compared to no intervention with a risk ratio of 1.11 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74 to 1.67). Discussion: The included studies provided evidence ranging from very low to moderate quality showing that educational materials, educational meetings, or a combination of the two did not considerably increase the reporting of occupational diseases

Workplace interventions for treatment of occupational asthma

The impact of workplace interventions on the outcome of occupational asthma is not well-understood. To evaluate the effectiveness of workplace interventions on the outcome of occupational asthma. We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE; EMBASE; NIOSHTIC-2; CISDOC and HSELINE up to February 2011. Randomised controlled trials, controlled before and after studies and interrupted time series of workplace interventions for occupational asthma. Two authors independently assessed study eligibility and trial quality, and extracted data. 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. 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 benefi

Annual incidence of occupational diseases in economic sectors in The Netherlands

Objective To report the annual incidence of occupational diseases (ODs) in economic sectors in The Netherlands. Methods In a 5-year prospective cohort study (2009-2013), occupational physicians were asked to participate in a sentinel surveillance system for OD notification. The inclusion criteria for participation were (1) covering a population of employees, (2) reporting the economic sectors and the size of their employee population and (3) willingness to report all diagnosed ODs. In this study, an OD was defined as a disease with a specific clinical diagnosis that was predominantly caused by work-related factors. The economic sectors (n=21) were defined according the NACE (Nomenclature des Activites Economiques dans la Communaute Europeenne) classification. Results In a total working population of 514 590 employees, 1782 ODs were reported over 12 months in 2009. The estimated annual incidence for any OD was 346 (95% CI 330 to 362) per 100 000 worker-years. Of all the ODs, mental diseases were reported most frequently (41%), followed by musculoskeletal (39%), hearing (11%), infectious (4%), skin (3%), neurological (2%) and respiratory (2%) diseases. The four economic sectors with the highest annual incidences per 100 000 workers were construction (1127; 95% CI 1002 to 1253), mining and quarrying (888; 95% CI 110 to 1667), water and waste processing (832; 95% CI 518 to 1146) and transport and storage (608; 95% CI 526 to 690). Conclusion ODs are reported in all economic sectors in The Netherlands. Up to 91% of all ODs are mental, musculoskeletal and hearing diseases. Efforts to increase the effective assessment of ODs and compliance in reporting activities enhance the usability of incidence figures for the government, employers and worker

Characteristics of national registries for occupational diseases: international development and validation of an audit tool (ODIT)

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background-</p> <p>The aim of the study was to develop quality indicators that can be used for quality assessment of registries of occupational diseases in relation to preventive policy on a national level. The research questions were: 1. Which indicators determine the quality of national registries of occupational diseases with respect to their ability to provide appropriate information for preventive policy? 2. What are the criteria that can distinguish low quality from high quality?</p> <p>Methods-</p> <p>First, we performed a literature search to assess which output of registries can be considered appropriate for preventive policy and to develop a set of preliminary indicators and criteria. Second, final indicators and criteria were assessed and their content validity was tested in a Delphi study, for which experts from the 25 EU Member States were invited.</p> <p>Results-</p> <p>The literature search revealed two different types of information output to be appropriate for preventive policy: monitor and alert information. For the evaluation of the quality of the monitor and alert function we developed ten indicators and criteria. Sixteen of the twenty-five experts responded in the first round of the Delphi study, and eleven in the second round. Based on their comments, we assessed the final nine indicators: the completeness of the notification form, coverage of registration, guidelines or criteria for notification, education and training of reporting physicians, completeness of registration, statistical methods used, investigation of special cases, presentation of monitor information, and presentation of alert information. Except for the indicator "coverage of registration" for the alert function, all the indicators met the preset requirements of content validity.</p> <p>Conclusion-</p> <p>We have developed quality indicators and criteria to evaluate registries for occupational diseases on the ability to provide appropriate information for preventive policy on a national level. Together, these indicators form a tool which can be used for quality improvement of registries of occupational diseases.</p