Abstract
Objective To quantify occupational risks of Covid-19 among healthcare staff during the first wave of the pandemic in England
Methods Using pseudonymised data on 902,813 individuals continuously employed by 191 National Health Service trusts during 1.1.19 to 31.7.20, we explored demographic and occupational risk factors for sickness absence ascribed to Covid-19 during 9.3.20 to 31.7.20 (n = 92,880). We estimated odds ratios (ORs) by multivariate logistic regression.
Results With adjustment for employing trust, demographic characteristics, and previous frequency of sickness absence, risk relative to administrative/clerical occupations was highest in additional clinical services (a group that included care assistants) (OR 2.31), registered nursing and midwifery professionals (OR 2.28) and allied health professionals (OR 1.94), and intermediate in doctors and dentists (OR 1.55). Differences in risk were higher after the employing trust had started to care for documented Covid-19 patients, and were reduced, but not eliminated, following additional adjustment for exposure to infected patients or materials, assessed by a job-exposure matrix. For prolonged Covid-19 sickness absence (episodes lasting >14 days), the variation in risk by staff group was somewhat greater.
Conclusions After allowance for possible bias and confounding by non-occupational exposures, we estimated that relative risks for Covid-19 among most patient-facing occupations were between 1.5 and 2.5. The highest risks were in those working in additional clinical services, nursing and midwifery and in allied health professions. Better protective measures for these staff groups should be a priority. Covid-19 may meet criteria for compensation as an occupational disease in some healthcare occupations.
Key messages
What is already known about this subject?
Healthcare workers and other keyworkers (workers whose job was considered essential to societal functioning) had a higher likelihood of testing positive for COVID-19 than other workers during the first lockdown in England. Amongst healthcare workers, those working in inpatient settings had the highest rate of infection.
What are the new findings?
Between March and July 2000, the overall risk of COVID-19 sickness absence in National Health Service staff in England was lower at older ages, higher in non-white staff, and (in comparison with administrative and clerical staff) more than doubled in registered nurses and among workers such as healthcare assistants providing support to health professionals. Risk in health care scientists was little different from that in administrative and clerical occupations
How might this impact on policy or clinical practice in the foreseeable future?
Our results suggest that the risk reduction strategies that were in place for healthcare scientists were effective. However, the protection for nursing and supporting health professionals was insufficient. In the event of a further ‘wave’ of infections resulting in high hospital admissions, attention should be paid to ensuring that risk reduction strategies for nurses and supporting health professionals are improved.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Clinical Trial
N/A
Funding Statement
This study was funded by a grant from the COLT Foundation.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Approval to conduct the study was granted by the NHS Health Research Authority (reference 20/SC/0282),
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data requests should be submitted to the corresponding author for consideration.
