Project description:IntroductionThe phase 3 trial PALISADE, comparing peanut (Arachis hypogaea) allergen powder-dnfp (PTAH) oral immunotherapy versus placebo in peanut-allergic children, reported that a significantly higher percentage of PTAH-treated participants tolerated higher doses of peanut protein after 1 year of treatment. This study used PALISADE data to estimate the reduction in the risk of systemic allergic reaction (SAR) after accidental exposure following 1 year of PTAH treatment.MethodsParticipants (aged 4-17 years) enrolled in PALISADE were included. Parametric interval-censoring survival analysis with the maximum likelihood estimation was used to construct a real-world distribution of peanut protein exposure using lifetime SAR history and highest tolerated dose (HTD) from a double-blind, placebo-controlled food challenge conducted at baseline. The SAR risk reduction was extrapolated using the exposure distribution and the HTD were collected at baseline and trial exit for PTAH- and placebo-treated participants.ResultsAssuming a maximum peanut protein intake of 1500 mg, participants were estimated to have < 1% probability of ingesting > 0.01 mg during daily life. The mean annual SAR risk at trial entry was 9.25-9.98%. At trial exit, the relative SAR risk reduction following accidental exposure was 94.9% for PTAH versus 6.4% for placebo. For PTAH-treated participants with exit HTD of 600 or 1000 mg without dose-limiting symptoms, the SAR risk reduction increased to 97.2%. The result was consistent in the sensitivity analysis across different parametric distributions.ConclusionOral immunotherapy with PTAH is expected to result in a substantially greater reduction in risk of SAR following accidental exposure compared to placebo among children with peanut allergy.
Project description:OBJECTIVE:To explore the association between the psychosocial work environment and the risk of sick leave among governmental employees with symptom-defined post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) after a workplace bomb attack. DESIGN:A prospective study on employees who met the symptom criteria for PTSD. Questionnaire data on the psychosocial work environment 10 months after the terrorist attack was linked to registry data on doctor-certified sick leave in the period 12-22 months after the attack. SETTING:The bombing of the government ministries in Oslo, Norway, 22 July 2011. PARTICIPANTS:The study sample consists of 94 Norwegian governmental employees, all with symptom-defined PTSD from the Norwegian version of the PTSD checklist (Post-traumatic Stress Disorder Checklist-Specific) measured 10 months after the attack. RESULTS:After adjustment for sex and severity of PTSD symptoms, predictability at work reduced the odds of sick leave (adjusted OR=0.62, 95%?CI 0.40 to 0.98). Sense of control over decisions at work was associated with fewer absence days for employees with sick leave (adjusted rate ratio=0.61, 95%?CI 0.38 to 0.98). CONCLUSIONS:Employees with PTSD after workplace terrorism would benefit from control over their workplace conditions and increased predictability to reduce the risk of sick leave. The findings suggest that the work environment can facilitate employees' work ability after stressful events, independent of severity of PTSD symptoms.
Project description:Many survivors after trauma suffer from long-term morbidity. The aim of this observational cohort study was to develop a prognostic prediction tool for early assessment of full-time sick leave one year after trauma. Potential predictors were assessed combining individuals from a trauma register with national health registers. Two models were developed using logistic regression and stepwise backward elimination. 4458 individuals were included out of which 488 were on sick leave full-time 12 months after the trauma. One comprehensive and one simplified model were developed including nine and seven predictors respectively. Both models showed excellent discrimination (AUC 0.81). The comprehensive model had very good calibration, and the simplified model good calibration. Prediction models can be used to assess post-trauma sick leave using injury-related variables as well as factors not related to the trauma per se. Among included variables, pre-injury sick leave was the single most important predictor for full-time sick leave one year after trauma. These models could facilitate a more efficient use of resources, targeting groups for follow-up interventions to improve outcome. External validation is necessary in order to evaluate generalizability.
Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has caused difficulties and changes in many aspects of people's health and lives. Although infection affected work capacity, during the first wave policies for sick leave due to COVID-19 were unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of sick leave diagnoses in the year before the COVID-19 diagnosis on sick leave duration due to COVID-19 in a nationwide non-hospitalised population.MethodsData from three Swedish registries were analysed for sick leave commencing between 1 March and 31 August 2020, with a follow-up period of 4 months. Sick leave due to COVID-19 was considered the number of days that sickness benefits were used and included at least one registered COVID-19 diagnosis. Sick leave in the year before COVID-19 diagnosis were categorised into five diagnostic groups and one reference group (participants without prior sick leave).ResultsThe study comprised 8935 individuals who received sickness benefits due to COVID-19 in Sweden during the first pandemic wave (mean age 46.7 years, 67% females, and 24% had diagnoses for sick leave in the year before COVID-19 diagnosis). The duration of sick leave due to COVID-19 was significantly higher in the groups with prior sick leave owing to musculoskeletal system diseases (odds ratio [OR]: 1.08, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.01-1.15); respiratory system diseases (OR: 1.22, 95% CI: 1.14-1.31); all other isolated diagnoses (OR: 1.08, 95% CI: 1.03-1.14); and multiple diagnoses (OR: 1.32, 95% CI: 1.21-1.43).ConclusionsThe results of this nationwide registry-based study indicate that individuals with premorbid conditions are more prone to longer sick leave durations due to COVID-19. Prediction of sick leave duration during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic is complex and several factors played a role.
Project description:ObjectivesTo quantify population-level health and economic consequences of sick leave among workers with influenza symptoms.InterventionsCompared with current sick leave practice (baseline), we evaluated the health and cost consequences of: (1) increasing the proportion of workers on sick leave from 65% (baseline) to 80% or 90%; (2) shortening the maximum duration from symptom onset to sick leave from 4 days (baseline) to 2 days, 1.5 days, 1 day and 0.5 days; and (3) combinations of 1 and 2.MethodsA dynamic compartmental influenza model was developed using Norwegian population data and survey data on employee sick leave practices. The sick leave interventions were simulated under 12 different seasonal epidemic and 36 different pandemic influenza scenarios. These scenarios varied in terms of transmissibility, the proportion of symptomatic cases and illness severity (risk of primary care consultations, hospitalisations and deaths). Using probabilistic sensitivity analyses, a net health benefit approach was adopted to assess the cost-effectiveness of the interventions from a societal perspective.ResultsCompared with current sick leave practice, sick leave interventions were cost-effective for 31 (65%) of the pandemic scenarios, and 11 (92%) of the seasonal scenarios. Economic benefits from sick leave interventions were greatest for scenarios with low transmissibility, high symptomatic proportions and high illness severity. Overall, the health and economic benefits were greatest for the intervention involving 90% of sick workers taking sick leave within one-half day of symptoms. Depending on the influenza scenario, this intervention resulted in a 44.4%-99.7% reduction in the attack rate. Interventions involving sick leave onset beginning 2 days or later, after the onset of symptoms, resulted in economic losses.ConclusionsPrompt sick leave onset and a high proportion of sick leave among workers with influenza symptoms may be cost-effective, particularly during influenza epidemics and pandemics with low transmissibility or high morbidity.
Project description:ObjectivesThe aim was to study whether a workplace-registered frequent short-term sick leave spell pattern was an early indicator of future disability pension or future long-term sick leave among municipal eldercare workers.SettingThe municipal healthcare sector in the city of Aarhus, which is the second largest city in Denmark.ParticipantsAll elder care employees who worked the entire year of 2004 in the municipality of Aarhus, Denmark (N=2774). The employees' sick leave days during 2004 were categorised into: 0-2 and 3-17 short (1-7 days) spells, 2-13 mixed short and long (8+ days) spells and long spells only. Student workers (n=180), employees who were absent due to maternal/paternal leave (n=536) and employees who did not work the entire year of 2004 (n=1218) were not included.Primary outcomeDisability pension and long-term sick leave (≥8 weeks) were subsequently identified in a National register. The cumulative incidence proportion as a function of follow-up weeks was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier curve. The relative cumulative incidence (RR) of experiencing events within 352 weeks was analysed in a generalised linear regression model using the pseudo values method adjusted for age, occupation, unfavourable work factors and sick leave length.ResultsA frequent short-term and a mixed sick leave pattern showed RRs of being granted a disability pension of 2.08 (95% CI 1.00 to 4.35) and 2.61 (95% CI 1.33 to 5.12) compared with 0-2 short spells. The risk of long-term sick leave was significantly increased for all sick leave patterns compared with 0-2 short spells. Adding sick leave length to the models attenuated all RRs and they became non-significant.ConclusionsSick leave length was a better indicator of future workability than spell frequency. Preventive actions should target employees engaged in homecare. The more sick leave days the greater the preventive potential seems, irrespective of spell frequency.
Project description:I analyze how general practitioners (GPs) indirectly affect their patients' employment outcomes by deciding the length of sick leaves. I use an instrumental variables framework where spell durations are identified through supply-side certification measures. I find that a day of sick leave certified only because the worker's GP has a high propensity to certify sick leaves decreases the employment probability persistently by 0.45-0.69 percentage points, but increases the risk of becoming unemployed by 0.28-0.44 percentage points. These effects are mostly driven by workers with low job tenure. Several robustness checks show that endogenous matching between patients and GPs does not impair identification. My results bear important implications for doctors: Whenever medically justifiable, certifying shorter sick leaves to protect the employment status of the patient may be beneficial.
Project description:ObjectiveTo profile the sick leave landscape in the United States.Data sourcesThe 2011 Leave Supplement of the American Time Use Survey.Study designBivariate and multivariate analyses to identify (i) employees without sick pay coverage and (ii) employees who attend work sick.Principal findingsSixty-five percent of full-time employees have sick pay coverage. Coverage rates are below 20 percent for employees with hourly wages below $10, part-time employees, and employees in the hospitality and leisure industry.ConclusionEach week, up to 3 million U.S. employees go to work sick. Females, low-income earners, and those aged 25 to 34 years have a significantly elevated risk of presenteeism behavior.
Project description:Egg allergy is a common pediatric allergy, and is usually outgrown by elementary school age. There is, therefore, a need to perform an oral food challenge (OFC) to establish the presence of food allergy to egg. In this study, we conducted a retrospective review of 2304 OFCs at a pediatric center and analyzed the severity of reactions during egg OFCs and compared them with other foods. The gastrointestinal system (GI) has been reported as more affected in egg food challenge. This study confirmed that 11% of patients undergoing egg OFC had GI symptoms vs. 7% undergoing food challenges for other foods or compared to milk, peanut and tree nut, individually. However, the involvement of lower respiratory tract was less frequent with egg than observed in peanut and tree nut OFC and similar to observed rate in milk. In conclusion, our study confirmed that OFC to egg causes more GI symptoms and less respiratory symptoms compared to other foods, in particular peanuts and tree nuts. However, 27% of children who failed egg OFC had lower respiratory tract reactions and required the use of epinephrine, similarly to children undergoing milk challenge.
Project description:BackgroundAlthough previous studies have focused on unintentional food-related allergic reactions, few have explored the motivation of intentional exposure to a known food allergen, independent of oral food challenges and/or oral immunotherapy. Still, data on the frequency and context of food-related allergic reactions remain sparse.ObjectiveTo identify the frequency and context of food-related allergic reactions among children and adults.MethodsWe analyzed surveys from the Patient Registry established by Food Allergy Research and Education. Multivariable logistic regression evaluated characteristics associated with having frequent food-related allergic reactions as well as intentional food-related allergic reactions.ResultsOver one-third of 4075 (37.7%) respondents reported having more than 1 food-related allergic reaction per year, and 12.8% reported having 1 reaction per year. Of the 3054 respondents who completed the most recent reaction survey, 9.9% of food allergen exposures were classified as intentional, 82.1% as unintentional, and 4.8% as medically related. Among children with intentional exposures, the most common reason was that the child had never had a serious reaction (50.0%), and among adults, it was the decision to take the risk anyway (47.8%). Cross-contamination was the most commonly cited reason for unintentional exposure (children: 24.1%; adults: 32.2%).ConclusionAmong patients in a national food allergy registry, reports of food-related allergic reactions were common, and a non-negligible number of intentional reactions were reported. Our findings indicate the need for research on reactions in and out of the emergency department as well as intentional risk-taking behavior.