Post-acute COVID-19 syndrome is frequently observed in workers and has a substantial impact on work ability. We conducted a health promotion program to identify cases of post-COVID syndrome, analyze the distribution of symptoms and their association with work ability. Of the 1422 workers who underwent routine medical examination in 2021, 1378 agreed to participate. Among the latter, 164 had contracted SARS-CoV-2 and 115 (70% of those who were infected) had persistent symptoms. A cluster analysis showed that most of the post-COVID syndrome cases were characterized by sensory disturbances (anosmia and dysgeusia) and fatigue (weakness, fatigability, tiredness). In one-fifth of these cases, additional symptoms included dyspnea, tachycardia, headache, sleep disturbances, anxiety, and muscle aches. Workers with post-COVID were found to have poorer quality sleep, increased fatigue, anxiety, depression, and decreased work ability compared with workers whose symptoms had rapidly disappeared. It is important for the occupational physician to diagnose post-COVID syndrome in the workplace since this condition may require a temporary reduction in work tasks and supportive treatment.

Exposure to major trauma can have significant consequences for workers’ mental health, but common trauma may also result in poor mental health outcomes. This cross-sectional study retrospectively investigated the occurrence of common physical or psychological workplace trauma in 901 health, social service, and trading company workers and studied these experiences in relation to occupational stress, anxiety, and depression. Stress was measured with the effort/reward imbalance (ERI) model while anxiety and depression were evaluated with the Goldberg Anxiety and Depression Scale (GADS). Healthcare workers reported a high frequency of trauma and significantly higher levels of stress, anxiety, and depression than other workers. Even in the entire population of workers of the various professional categories, verbal violence (harassment and threats), traffic accidents, home injuries, and family bereavement were significantly associated with high levels of stress, anxiety, and depression. Major trauma survivors are known to be at increased risk of mental disorders and require support in the workplace, however, even minor repeated emotional trauma and injuries can affect mental health. During mandatory health surveillance, the occupational physician should systematically collect information on minor trauma and mental health outcomes when assessing the occupational fitness of the workers assigned to him.

Syncope and presyncope episodes that occur during work could affect one’s safety and impair occupational performance. Few data are available regarding the prevalence of these events among workers. The possible role of sleep quality, mental stress, and metabolic disorders in promoting syncope, presyncope, and falls in workers is unknown. In the present study, 741 workers (male 35.4%; mean age 47 ± 11 years), employed at different companies, underwent clinical evaluation and blood tests, and completed questionnaires to assess sleep quality, occupational distress, and mental disorders. The occurrence of syncope, presyncope, and unexplained falls during working life was assessed via an ad hoc interview. The prevalence of syncope, presyncope, and falls of unknown origin was 13.9%, 27.0%, and 10.3%, respectively. The occurrence of syncope was associated with an increased risk of occupational distress (adjusted odds ratio aOR: 1.62, confidence intervals at 95%: 1.05–2.52), low sleep quality (aOR: 1.79 CI 95%: 1.16–2.77), and poor mental health (aOR: 2.43 CI 95%: 1.52–3.87). Presyncope was strongly associated with occupational distress (aOR: 1.77 CI 95%: 1.25–2.49), low sleep quality (aOR: 2.95 CI 95%: 2.08–4.18), and poor mental health (aOR: 2.61 CI 95%: 1.78–3.84), while no significant relationship was found between syncope or presyncope and metabolic syndrome. These results suggest that occupational health promotion interventions aimed at improving sleep quality, reducing stressors, and increasing worker resilience might reduce syncope and presyncope events in the working population.

A case–control study including 446 workers reporting headaches (cases; 136 males and 310 females, mean age 46.71 ± 10.84 years) and 446 age- and sex-matched colleagues without headaches (controls; mean age 45.44 ± 10.13) was conducted in the second half of 2020 in a sample drawn from socio health and commercial services companies to investigate the association of headache with lifestyle, metabolic, and work-related factors. Workers suffering from headache reported higher body weight (OR: 1.92, 95% CI: 1.46–2.53, p < 0.001), higher blood cholesterol (OR: 2.01, 95% CI: 1.46–2.77, p < 0.001), triglyceride (OR: 2.01, 95% CI: 1.20–3.35, p < 0.01), blood glucose (OR: 1.91, 95% CI: 1.16–3.24, p < 0.01), and blood pressure levels (OR: 1.76, 95% CI: 1.23–2.52, p < 0.01). In the year preceding the survey, cases had experienced a higher frequency of workplace violence (OR: 2.29, 95% CI: 1.25–4.20, p < 0.01 for physical aggression, OR: 2.22, 95% CI: 1.45–3.41, p < 0.001 for threat, OR: 2.74, 95% CI: 1.72–4.38, p < 0.001 for harassment) and were more frequently distressed (effort/reward ratio > 1) (OR: 1.82, 95% CI: 1.39–2.40, p < 0.001) than the controls. Compared to the controls, cases also had higher scores on anxiety and depression scales, lower scores on happiness, and lower levels of sleep quality (p < 0.001). The association of headaches with metabolic and mental health problems suggests that monitoring headaches in the workplace could help to identify workers at risk of impairment.

Introduction: Vaccination practice is a well-known individual protective measure for biological risk in healthcare. During the COVID-19 pandemic vaccine hesitancy has grown among healthcare workers (HCWs). The study aims to investigate how vaccine hesitancy influences the psychological burden experienced by healthcare workers.Methods: This study aimed to explore attitudes of HCWs in acceptance or refusal of vaccinations related to the risk of psychological impairment (PI) and describe the associated occupational factors, during the seasonal flu/COVID-19 vaccination campaign of 2022–2023. 302 HCWs were enrolled in the study. A questionnaire was self-administered, including two scales on the risk of psychological impairment (Psychological Injury Risk Indicator, PIRI) and vaccine hesitancy (Adult Vaccine Hesitancy Scale, AVHS).Results: PIRI scores revealed that 29.8% of participants were at risk of PI. Differences in sex, age, occupational seniority, professional category, and night shifts were found between HCWs at risk of PI and those not at risk. Females registered a four-fold higher risk than males (85.6% vs. 14.4%, χ² = 4.450, p < 0.05). Nurses were the highest risk category, followed by physicians and technicians (54.4% vs. 30.0% vs. 12.2%, χ² = 14.463, p < 0.001). 41.7% of participants received the flu vaccination, and 98.9% received the COVID-19 vaccine. HCWs were prone to being vaccinated to protect patients and family members. Conversely, vaccine refusal was attributed to the perception of flu vaccines as not beneficial and COVID-19 contagion at low risk. The latter was more frequently reported for HCWs at risk of PI (16.7% vs. 4.7%, χ² = 11.882, p = 0.001). Finally, hesitant HCWs were at higher risk of psychological impairment than others.Discussion: HCWs expressed vaccine acceptance considering their social role in the community as protectors. However, the underestimation of the risk of severity of COVID-19 was more relevant among HCWs at risk of PI than others. Psychological aspects need to be considered by healthcare providers when fighting vaccine hesitancy.

Background: Over 20% of healthcare workers (HCWs) are active smokers. Smoking is a targeted issue for workplace health promotion (WHP) programs. Objective: Our study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of the Stop Smoking Promotion (SSP) intervention, a 6-hour training course for HCWs, which took place from May 2018 to July 2019. Methods: We compared HCWs who successfully quit smoking (n = 15) to those who did not (n = 25) in terms of Sickness Absence Days (SADs). Moreover, we conducted an econometric analysis by calculating the return on investment and implementing a break-even analysis. Findings: Among the 40 enrolled workers, a success rate of 37.5% was observed after a span of over two years from the SSP intervention (with nurses and physicians showed the best success rate). Overall, participants showed a noticeable absenteeism reduction after the SSP intervention, with a reduction rate of 85.0% in a one-year period. The estimated ROI for the hospital was 1.90, and the break-even point was 7.85. In other words, the organization nearly doubled its profit from the investment, and the success of at least eight participants balanced costs and profits. Conclusion: Our pilot study confirms that WHP programs are simple and cost-saving tools which may help improve control over the smoking pandemic in healthcare settings.