A number of epidemiological studies report an association between occupational noise exposure and arterial hypertension. Existing systematic reviews report conflicting results, so we conducted an updated systematic review with meta-analysis. We registered the review protocol with PROSPERO (registration no.: CRD 42019147923) and searched for observational epidemiological studies in literature databases (Medline, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science). Two independent reviewers screened the titles/abstracts and full texts of the studies. Two reviewers also did the quality assessment and data extraction. Studies without adequate information on recruitment, response, or without a comparison group that was exposed to occupational noise under 80 dB(A) were excluded. The literature search yielded 4583 studies, and 58 studies were found through hand searching. Twenty-four studies were included in the review. The meta-analysis found a pooled effect size (ES) for hypertension (systolic/diastolic blood pressure ≥140/90 mmHg) due to noise exposures ≥80 dB(A) of 1.75 (95% CI 1.46–2.10). There is no substantial risk difference between men and women, but data concerning this question are limited. We found a positive dose-response-relationship: ES = 1.21 (95% CI 0.78–1.87) ≤ 80 dB(A), ES = 1.66 (95% CI 1.24–2.22) > 80–≤85 dB(A), and ES = 3.38 (95% CI 1.37–8.35) > 85–≤90 dB(A). We found high quality of evidence that occupational noise exposure increases the risk of hypertension.

Purpose of Review: Workplace noise negatively impacts health, and noise-induced hearing loss is the most common work-related disease in many countries. Occupational noise may also cause cardiovascular disease, and there is epidemiologic evidence on the non-auditory effects of noise. This paper aims to briefly present and summarize the latest evidence on the auditory and non-auditory health effects of occupational noise exposure from the last 5 years. Recent Findings: Two systematic reviews assessing the cardiovascular effects of occupational noise exposure were published in the last year. Our own recent review found convincing evidence of an association between occupational noise exposure > 80 dB(A) and hypertension and a dose-response relationship between noise exposure and hypertension risk. Another review of cardiovascular disease conducted by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Labour Organization (ILO) found an increased risk of incident ischemic heart disease at noise exposures ≥ 85 dB(A). Recent reviews on work-related injuries, diabetes, acoustic neuroma, and pregnancy outcomes also find noise-related associations. Summary: Evidence of an association between occupational noise and cardiovascular outcomes was recently evaluated. We found the risk of hypertension increases with a clear dose-response relationship at noise levels > 80 dB(A). The WHO/ILO review highlights the lack of quality research including women. Additional high-quality research on epigenetic effects, oxidative stress, work-related injuries, diabetes, acoustic neuroma, and pregnancy outcomes is also needed. Urgently needed (increased) measures of workplace noise reduction will reduce the incidence of noise-induced hearing loss and help prevent cardiovascular diseases, especially hypertension.

Several reviews have reported an increased risk of obstructive respiratory diseases in workers exposed to cleaning or disinfection agents, but they have focused mainly on professional cleaners. Cleaning and disinfecting are frequently performed activities by healthcare workers. We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis to quantify the risk of obstructive respiratory diseases in healthcare workers exposed to cleaning and disinfection agents. We searched the Medline and Embase databases until 4 February 2021 to find adequate primary studies. Two independent reviewers screened the titles/abstracts and the full texts of the studies, as well as performing data extraction and quality assessment. The literature search yielded 9432 records, and 8 studies were found through a hand search. After screening, 14 studies were included in the review. All had a high risk of bias, and most studies dealt with nurses, asthma, and hyperresponsiveness (BHR)-related symptoms. Only one study investigated COPD. The meta-analysis estimated an increased risk of new-onset asthma for nurses (Effect size (ES) = 1.67; 95% CI 1.11–2.50) compared with other occupations and found an increase in the risk of new-onset asthma for nurses exposed to cleaning and disinfecting surfaces (ES = 1.43; 95% CI 1.09–1.89) and instruments (ES = 1.34; 95% CI 1.09–1.65). Exposure to specific chemicals such as bleach and glutaraldehyde (GA) increased the risk of asthma in nurses (bleach ES = 2.44; 95% CI 1.56–3.82; GA ES = 1.91, 95% CI 1.35–2.70). A higher risk for BHR-related symptoms was observed for nurses exposed to cleaning surfaces (ES = 1.44; 95% CI 1.18–1.78). Although the overall evidence was rated as low, the limitations found in this review hint at a potential underestimation of the real risk. These findings highlight the need for reinforced prevention practices with regard to healthcare workers. Similar research investigating these associations among other healthcare workers such as rescue service and nursing home personnel is needed.

Weather conditions may have an impact on SARS-CoV-2 virus transmission, as has been shown for seasonal influenza. Virus transmission most likely favors low temperature and low humidity conditions. This systematic review aimed to collect evidence on the impact of temperature and humidity on COVID-19 mortality. This review was registered with PROSPERO (registration no. CRD42020196055). We searched the Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane COVID-19 databases for observational epidemiological studies. Two independent reviewers screened the title/abstracts and full texts of the studies. Two reviewers also performed data extraction and quality assessment. From 5051 identified studies, 11 were included in the review. Although the results were inconsistent, most studies imply that a decrease in temperature and humidity contributes to an increase in mortality. To establish the association with greater certainty, future studies should consider accurate exposure measurements and important covariates, such as government lockdowns and population density, sufficient lag times, and non-linear associations.

We are grateful for the insightful comments in