Background : Healthcare workers (HCWs) face occupational exposure to hepatitis C virus (HCV). Screening acceptability is essential to implement new strategies. Aim : To assess HCV screening acceptability and associated factors among HCWs in a Romanian multidisciplinary hospital. Methods : Cross-sectional study within the “Cancer Prevention at Work” project (2024–2025). Out of 1,189 invited HCWs, 910 (76.5%) participated; 712 accepted blood testing (Group A), 198 completed questionnaires (Group B), and 279 refused entirely (Group C). Anti-HCV antibodies were detected using a combined ELISA and chemiluminescence test; positives underwent real-time RT-PCR test. Chi-square and Fisher tests analysed associations (p<0.05). Results : Women were significantly more likely to accept testing than men (p=0.021). Younger age groups participated more (p<0.001); participants ≥61 years refused most often. Stretcher bearers had the lowest acceptance; administrative staff the highest (p=0.022 for Group A vs B). Lower education correlated with refusal (p=0.044). Smokers accepted testing more than non-smokers (p=0.043). No significant associations with residence, comorbidities, or HBV vaccination. Of 712 tested, 10 (1.4%) were anti-HCV antibody positive; 1 (0.14%) had PCR positive with active infection. Conclusion : HCV screening acceptability was high (76.5%) but varied by sex, age, profession, education, and smoking status. Targeted interventions for older, lower-educated, and high-exposure groups (e.g., stretcher bearers) are needed to support occupational HCV elimination.

Introduction: For lung cancer, the total interval time to diagnosis (TITD) is very important. If not detected by the screening program, the actual guidelines emphasize the need for a short delay to assure the initiation of treatment before 2 months from the initial symptoms. In order to shorten TITD, the individual risk has to be properly assessed by the primary physician. Objective: The assessment of the influence of the occupational exposure on the diagnostic delay—from the onset of symptoms to confirmed diagnosis—in a population of patients with lung cancer. Material and methods: A total of 110 cases were recruited and were divided into two groups based on the individual assessment by an occupational physician. Results: There were 38 cases (34.55%) at high risk according to their occupational exposure and 72 controls. On average, the TITD was 3.41 +/−5.12 months. The TITD was significantly longer in the high-risk group (p = 0.03). A larger proportion cases had longer TITD: 55.17% of cases vs. 44.83% of controls (p = 0.006). In a multivariate analysis including covariates’ age, sex, level of education, health literacy, number of packs-years, family history of cancer, and previous lung diseases associated with a high risk of lung cancer, the highest risk derived from the previous occupational exposure was the only variable statistically associated with TITD (OR = 10.57, 2.06–54.34, p = 0.01). Discussion: Awareness about the occupational risk in workers who are or have been exposed and in health providers could reduce the total interval time to diagnosis.

Background/Objectives: Empowerment strategies promoting healthy behaviors are important for preventing chronic diseases and cancer, while individual health responsibility (IHR) plays a significant role. Although widely discussed in the literature, the concept of IHR does not have clearly defined domains or a validated instrument for assessment. Its overlap with locus of control theory, self-motivation, and personality type creates further difficulties. Meanwhile, perception of one’s own responsibility for health is an intuitive, simple item to answer, reflecting a person’s belief related to this topic. Moreover, for ethical reasons, this concept cannot be separated from personal beliefs and should not be adjusted according to strict scales and externally imposed definitions. Therefore, this study aimed to: (1) explore whether there is an association between self-perception of IHR and preventive/risk-taking behaviors; and (2) examine socio-demographic factors associated with the IHR score and three self-perceived characteristics, namely self-perceived locus of control, health literacy, and health status. Methods: A cross-sectional study with 968 healthcare workers was conducted in a large, multidisciplinary hospital covering several behaviors (smoking, alcohol consumption, diet, and participation in a screening program for hepatitis C). IHR was evaluated on a scale from 1 to 10, where 1 meant “to very little extent” and 10 meant “to a great extent”. Results: The average IHR score was 8.80 (SD = 1.88). In the univariate analysis, the IHR score was significantly related to gender, age, education, marital status, and all three personal characteristics. In the multivariate analysis, the socio-demographic associations lost statistical significance. IHR maintained its association with the healthy diet score in the multivariable model (B = 0.113, p = 0.036). In the unadjusted analyses, the distribution of IHR differed between participants who declared alcohol consumption and those who declared abstinence (χ² = 17.157, p = 0.002). However, this association was not retained in the multivariable model. Self-perceived internal locus of control was negatively associated with screening acceptance, but not with IHR. The OR of 0.927 refers to a one-point increase on the 1–10 scale. Across the full observed scale range, this corresponds to an OR of 0.51 (95% CI: 0.29–0.89), indicating lower odds of screening acceptance among participants with higher perceived internal control. Because this estimate assumes linearity across the entire scale, it should be interpreted cautiously. Conclusions: The gap between perceived responsibility and actual behavior suggests that IHR messaging alone is unlikely to be sufficient. Future research should consider social desirability and external locus of control when analyzing IHR and health behaviors.