Cargando…

Occupational differences in SARS-CoV-2 infection: analysis of the UK ONS COVID-19 infection survey

BACKGROUND: Concern remains about how occupational SARS-CoV-2 risk has evolved during the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to ascertain occupations with the greatest risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and explore how relative differences varied over the pandemic. METHODS: Analysis of cohort data from the UK Of...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Rhodes, Sarah, Wilkinson, Jack, Pearce, Neil, Mueller, William, Cherrie, Mark, Stocking, Katie, Gittins, Matthew, Katikireddi, Srinivasa Vittal, Tongeren, Martie Van
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9484374/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35817467
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jech-2022-219101
_version_ 1784791869192929280
author Rhodes, Sarah
Wilkinson, Jack
Pearce, Neil
Mueller, William
Cherrie, Mark
Stocking, Katie
Gittins, Matthew
Katikireddi, Srinivasa Vittal
Tongeren, Martie Van
author_facet Rhodes, Sarah
Wilkinson, Jack
Pearce, Neil
Mueller, William
Cherrie, Mark
Stocking, Katie
Gittins, Matthew
Katikireddi, Srinivasa Vittal
Tongeren, Martie Van
author_sort Rhodes, Sarah
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Concern remains about how occupational SARS-CoV-2 risk has evolved during the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to ascertain occupations with the greatest risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and explore how relative differences varied over the pandemic. METHODS: Analysis of cohort data from the UK Office of National Statistics COVID-19 Infection Survey from April 2020 to November 2021. This survey is designed to be representative of the UK population and uses regular PCR testing. Cox and multilevel logistic regression were used to compare SARS-CoV-2 infection between occupational/sector groups, overall and by four time periods with interactions, adjusted for age, sex, ethnicity, deprivation, region, household size, urban/rural neighbourhood and current health conditions. RESULTS: Based on 3 910 311 observations (visits) from 312 304 working age adults, elevated risks of infection can be seen overall for social care (HR 1.14; 95% CI 1.04 to 1.24), education (HR 1.31; 95% CI 1.23 to 1.39), bus and coach drivers (1.43; 95% CI 1.03 to 1.97) and police and protective services (HR 1.45; 95% CI 1.29 to 1.62) when compared with non-essential workers. By time period, relative differences were more pronounced early in the pandemic. For healthcare elevated odds in the early waves switched to a reduction in the later stages. Education saw raises after the initial lockdown and this has persisted. Adjustment for covariates made very little difference to effect estimates. CONCLUSIONS: Elevated risks among healthcare workers have diminished over time but education workers have had persistently higher risks. Long-term mitigation measures in certain workplaces may be warranted.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9484374
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-94843742022-09-20 Occupational differences in SARS-CoV-2 infection: analysis of the UK ONS COVID-19 infection survey Rhodes, Sarah Wilkinson, Jack Pearce, Neil Mueller, William Cherrie, Mark Stocking, Katie Gittins, Matthew Katikireddi, Srinivasa Vittal Tongeren, Martie Van J Epidemiol Community Health Original Research BACKGROUND: Concern remains about how occupational SARS-CoV-2 risk has evolved during the COVID-19 pandemic. We aimed to ascertain occupations with the greatest risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection and explore how relative differences varied over the pandemic. METHODS: Analysis of cohort data from the UK Office of National Statistics COVID-19 Infection Survey from April 2020 to November 2021. This survey is designed to be representative of the UK population and uses regular PCR testing. Cox and multilevel logistic regression were used to compare SARS-CoV-2 infection between occupational/sector groups, overall and by four time periods with interactions, adjusted for age, sex, ethnicity, deprivation, region, household size, urban/rural neighbourhood and current health conditions. RESULTS: Based on 3 910 311 observations (visits) from 312 304 working age adults, elevated risks of infection can be seen overall for social care (HR 1.14; 95% CI 1.04 to 1.24), education (HR 1.31; 95% CI 1.23 to 1.39), bus and coach drivers (1.43; 95% CI 1.03 to 1.97) and police and protective services (HR 1.45; 95% CI 1.29 to 1.62) when compared with non-essential workers. By time period, relative differences were more pronounced early in the pandemic. For healthcare elevated odds in the early waves switched to a reduction in the later stages. Education saw raises after the initial lockdown and this has persisted. Adjustment for covariates made very little difference to effect estimates. CONCLUSIONS: Elevated risks among healthcare workers have diminished over time but education workers have had persistently higher risks. Long-term mitigation measures in certain workplaces may be warranted. BMJ Publishing Group 2022-10 2022-07-11 /pmc/articles/PMC9484374/ /pubmed/35817467 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jech-2022-219101 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Research
Rhodes, Sarah
Wilkinson, Jack
Pearce, Neil
Mueller, William
Cherrie, Mark
Stocking, Katie
Gittins, Matthew
Katikireddi, Srinivasa Vittal
Tongeren, Martie Van
Occupational differences in SARS-CoV-2 infection: analysis of the UK ONS COVID-19 infection survey
title Occupational differences in SARS-CoV-2 infection: analysis of the UK ONS COVID-19 infection survey
title_full Occupational differences in SARS-CoV-2 infection: analysis of the UK ONS COVID-19 infection survey
title_fullStr Occupational differences in SARS-CoV-2 infection: analysis of the UK ONS COVID-19 infection survey
title_full_unstemmed Occupational differences in SARS-CoV-2 infection: analysis of the UK ONS COVID-19 infection survey
title_short Occupational differences in SARS-CoV-2 infection: analysis of the UK ONS COVID-19 infection survey
title_sort occupational differences in sars-cov-2 infection: analysis of the uk ons covid-19 infection survey
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9484374/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35817467
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jech-2022-219101
work_keys_str_mv AT rhodessarah occupationaldifferencesinsarscov2infectionanalysisoftheukonscovid19infectionsurvey
AT wilkinsonjack occupationaldifferencesinsarscov2infectionanalysisoftheukonscovid19infectionsurvey
AT pearceneil occupationaldifferencesinsarscov2infectionanalysisoftheukonscovid19infectionsurvey
AT muellerwilliam occupationaldifferencesinsarscov2infectionanalysisoftheukonscovid19infectionsurvey
AT cherriemark occupationaldifferencesinsarscov2infectionanalysisoftheukonscovid19infectionsurvey
AT stockingkatie occupationaldifferencesinsarscov2infectionanalysisoftheukonscovid19infectionsurvey
AT gittinsmatthew occupationaldifferencesinsarscov2infectionanalysisoftheukonscovid19infectionsurvey
AT katikireddisrinivasavittal occupationaldifferencesinsarscov2infectionanalysisoftheukonscovid19infectionsurvey
AT tongerenmartievan occupationaldifferencesinsarscov2infectionanalysisoftheukonscovid19infectionsurvey