2008 occupational medical update: new millennium challenges for occupational respiratory...

2008 Occupational Medical Update:

New Millennium Challenges for Occupational Respiratory Exposures/Disorders

Are Medical Examinations Worth Doing?

A Presentation to:

ASSE

Howard M. Sandler, M.D.Sandler Occupational Medicine Associates, Inc.

October 6, 2008

© 2008 Sandler Occupational Medicine Associates, Inc.

HUMAN RESPIRATORY

SYSTEM


Deposition in Respiratory Tract

Particle Size (m)

> 15 m

10-15 m

5-10 m

<5 m

LocationOuter Portion Nasal Passage

Nasal Turbinates, Pharynx

Considered INHALED – Major Airways Trachea, Major Stem Bronchi

Considered RESPIRABLE –Terminal Bronchioles, Alveoli


Range of Occupational Respiratory Concerns

• Irritation• Inflammation• Chemical Pneumonitis• COPD• RAD (e.g. Asthma)• Reactive Airway Dysfunction Syndrome (RADS)• Interstitial Lung Fibrosis (IPF)• Lung Cancer• Hypersensitivity Pneumonitis• Allergic Disorders


Workplace Influence Potential

• Causation

• Contribution

• Aggravation

• Exacerbation

• Increased Decline in Pulmonary Function

• Symptoms vs. Pathogenicity


Ubiquity/Specificity of Respiratory Symptoms

• Cough

• Dyspnea• SOB• Wheeze

• Phlegm• DOE• Chest Pain/Pressure• Colds, Flu, other

URI’s


Common Symptom Prevalence

Symptom Mean PrevalenceCough 20%Difficulty breathing 17.7Wheezing 15%UR Symptoms 18%Stuffy or blocked nose 43.4Flu-like illness 10.6Eye dryness 30.3Eye, itching, watering 27.8Runny nose 25.8Dry throat 30.8Lethargy 62.6Headache 52.0


New Millennium Concerns

• Emerging Occupational Pulmonary Diseases – Popcorn Workers Lung, WTC Lung, Infectious Diseases

• Developing Technologies – Nanotechnology• Regulatory Activity – Sensitizers/Flour Dust,

Flavoring Agents and Silica• Workers Compensation – Symptoms v.

Pathogenesis, Enhanced Decline in Pulmonary Function


New Millennium Concerns (Cont’d)

• Business Response – Reactive v. Proactive, Programs v. Regulatory Compliance

• Impact of General Population Trends – Obesity, GERD, Allergies, Asthma


Food Flavorings

• Approximately 1,037 possible respiratory hazard flavorings

• Aldehydes, ketones, acids, thiols, sulfides • Few with PELs, RELs, TLVs


Microwave Pop-Corn Processing – Missouri Plant

• 8 workers with BO (ages 29 – 53) • Equal gender distribution • Latency – 0.5 – 5 years • One smoker (protective factor?)


Popcorn Workers Lung (Diacetyl?)

• There are numerous substances and conditions (e.g., heating) involved in the manufacture of MW pop-corn; specifically various particulates (oil/grease and salt) and numerous volatile organic compounds (over 100 VOCs) have been identified by the lead governmental agency, NIOSH in this research effort (Kullman, 2005)

• It is unclear whether diacetyl is the actual etiologic agent in whole or, part or is simply an indicator of exposure (OSHA, 2003; Harber, 2006; Hubbs, 2002)


Popcorn Workers Lung (Diacetyl?) (Cont’d)

• Kreiss, 2007 – Review, Causation?• Egilman, 2007 – Industry Conspiracy, NO Threshold• Schlesinger, 1998 – Critical Review for BO Risk Factors –

Flavorings/Diacetyl not Identified• Dr. Cecile Rose – National Jewish Medical and Research Center,

Denver– “Prior” Consultant to Flavorings Industry (FEMA)– July 18, 2007 Letter to FDA– Consumer with BO and Hx of Making Several Bags of

Extra Butter Flavored MW Popcorn for Several Years– Found Similar Diacetyl Airborne Levels to Those

Reported in QA Unit of Popcorn Manufacturing Plant


Prevalence of New or Worsened Respiratory Symptoms Among WT Workers by Date of Arrival for Work at WTC Site and by Exposure to the

Dust Cloud (n= 9,442)

All responders

(n = 9,442) (%)

Lower respiratory symptoms

Dry cough 28.7

Cough with phlegm 14.1

Shortness of breath 17.3

Wheeze 15.1

Chest tightness 15.4

Any lower respiratory symptom 46.5

Upper respiratory symptoms

Sinus - relatedb 37.3

Nasal - relatedc 48.4

Throat - relatedd 43.9

Any upper respiratory symptom 62.5

Any respiratory symptom 68.8

aOne-sided p-values using the Cochran - Armitage trend test. bFacial pain or pressure, head or sinus congestion, or postnasal, stuffy nose, sneezy, runny nose, or irritation in nose. dThroat irritation, hoarseness, sore throat or losing your voice (laryngitis)


Prevalence of New or Worsened Respiratory Symptoms Among WT Workers by Date of Arrival for Work at WTC Site and by Exposure to

the Dust Cloud (n= 9,442) (Cont’d)

Arrived on 11 SeptemberIn dust cloud Not in dust cloud(n= 1,878) (n= 1,934)(%) (%)

Lower respiratory symptoms Dry cough 34.2 30.6Cough with phlegm 17.6 13.4Shortness of breath 20.9 15.6Wheeze 18.3 15.5Chest tightness 18.5 14.4Any lower respiratory symptom 54.2 47.2

Upper respiratory symptomsSinus - related 41.9 36.9Nasal - related 52.4 48.6Throat - related 47.2 43.9Any upper respiratory symptom 65.8 62.4

Any respiratory symptom 73.4 69.7

aOne-sided p-values using the Cochran - Armitage trend test. bFacial pain or pressure, head or sinus congestion, or postnasal, stuffy nose, sneezy, runny nose, or irritation in nose. dThroat irritation, hoarseness, sore throat or losing your voice (laryngitis)


Prevalence of New or Worsened Respiratory Symptoms Among WT Workers by Date of Arrival for Work at WTC

Site and by Exposure to the Dust Cloud (n= 9,442) (Cont’d)

Arrived Arrived Arrived on or 12-13 September 14-30 September after 1 October(n=2,801) (%) (n=2,133) (%) (n=666) (%)

Lower respiratory symptomsDry cough 28.0 25.5 21.3Cough with phlegm 13.5 13.0 12.7Shortness of breath 17.1 16.1 16.6Wheeze 14.6 13.4 13.0Chest tightness 14.3 15.2 14.1Any lower respiratory symptom 44.2 43.8 40.8

Upper respiratory symptomsSinus – related 36.6 37.0 30.1Nasal – related 47.9 46.3 45.1Throat – related 43.1 43.6 39.7Any upper respiratory symptom 61.7 62.1 59.2

Any respiratory symptom 67.3 67.7 64.5

aOne-sided p-values using the Cochran - Armitage trend test. bFacial pain or pressure, head or sinus congestion, or postnasal, stuffy nose, sneezy, runny nose, or irritation in nose. D Throat irritation, hoarseness, sore throat or losing your voice (laryngitis)


Spirometry results (prebronchodilator) by date of arrival for work at WTC site and exposure to the dust cloud among the WTC MSP study population (n = 8,384). a

In dust cloud(no (%))

Not in dustCloud (no (%))

Arrived 12-13 Sep (no (%))

Arrived 14-30

Sep (no (%))

Arrived on or after 1 Oct (no (%))

Trend test p-value

Normal 1.160 (68.5) 1.222 (69.9) 1.78 (71.6) 1.397 (75.3) 453 (78.6) --

Obstructive 81 (4.8) 96 (5.5) 140 (5.6) 104 (5.6) 26 (4.9) 0.418

Low FVC 408 (24.1) 400 (22.9) 506 (20.3) 318 (17.1) 84 (14.6) <0.001

Obstruction and low FVC 44 (2.6) 29 (1.7) 61 (2.5) 36 (1.9) 11 (1.9) 0.095

Arrived on 11 Sep

*Only acceptable quality spirometric examinations are included as described by Miller et al (2005). *One-sided p-values using the Cochran-Armitage trend test. FVC FVC ratio less than 5th percentile of predicted and normal FVC FVC less than 5th percentile of predicted value and a normal FEV FVC ratio. FEV FVC ratio less than 5th percentil of predicted value and FVC less than 5th percentile of predicted value


Nanotechnology

• UFPs v. NPs• $1 Trillion Market by 2015• Next “Asbestos”• Specific Properties v. Toxicity• What do you measure?• Human Effects?• NIOSH - MMS


Quantum Effects

• The reduced size of nanoparticles results in property changes, in comparison to the bulk material:

– Electrical

– Mechanical

– Chemical

– Optical

TiO2 microspheres from sunscreen


Particle Comparison

• Theoretically then . . .

– 1,000,000 10 nm sized nanoparticles can be created from a single 10 um sized dust particle, and

– The effective dose (surface area) is 1,000 times greater even though the mass is unchanged


Silicosis & Asbestosis Deaths in the U.S. by Year

Silicosis

Asbestosis


Current Occupational Exposure Limits for Respirable: Quartz, Cristobalite, Tridymite and Amorphous Silica

(mg/m3)QUARTZ CRISTOBALITE TRIDYMITE AMORPHOUS

ACGIH*

0.025 0.025 Withdrawn 10 (Total Dust)

OSHA*

10mg/m3

%SiO2+ 2

½ value calculated from

the mass formulae for

quartz

½ value calculated from the

formulae for quartz

80mg/m3

%SiO2

MSHA*

SAME AS OSHA

SAME AS

OSHA

SAME AS OSHA

NIOSH**

0.05 0.05 0.05

*8-Hour Time Weighted Average ** For Up To 10-Hour Workday During A 40-Hour Workweek


NUMBER OF MSHA AND OSHA INSPECTOR SILICA SAMPLES AND PERCENT EXCEEDING THE PERMISSIBLE

EXPOSURE LIMIT (PEL) 1974- 1994


Exposure, Morbidity and Mortality

• Silicosis Risk– 1 – 95% of Workers at OSHA PEL Over

40 to 45 Years Working Lifetime– 1 – 7% at ½ NIOSH REL – 0.025 mg/m3

– 20% Increased Risk at 0.04 mg/m3 for 45 Years

– Current Prevalence Unknown– 300 Deaths Per Year


SOMA Exposure and EPI Study

• 6,000 Cohort, Stone/Gravel/Mining• Long-term – Morbidity (Various Endpoints)• Exposure Modeling Precision• Confounding Control• Objectives

– Dose-response Refinement– Health Effects Non-Silicosis– Disease Progression


Medical Monitoring SurveillanceB-Read X ray

Chest Xrays 2006

Changes, 0

Stable, 15

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

Stable

Changes


Aggregate FEV1 Data

Average FEV1 from Aggegate Data

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

2001 2003 2005

Year

Val

ue

FEV 1


Meta – Analysis of Risk for Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis Associated with Environmental and

Occupational Exposures

Exposure Risk Summary Estimates*

Agriculture/farming 1.65 (1.20 – 2.26)

Livestock 2.17 (1.28 – 3.68)

Wood dust 1.94 (1.34 – 2.81)

Metal dust 2.44 (1.74 – 3.40)

Stone/sand/silica 1.97 (1.09 – 3.55)

Smoking 1.58 (1.27 – 1.97)


COPD in Diesel – Exposed Railroad Workers, Hart et al, 2006

• Garshick/Harvard• Case – Control – Workers Deaths, 1981-1982• 536 COPD Cases• OR – 1.61 After Confounding Adjustment• Smoking History Cases

Cases (%)Controls (%)

Never 4.3 17.4

Current 29.1 26.6Former 50.0 36.4


Other PF Decline “Accelerators”

• Silicon Metals and Alloys (Soyseth et al, 2007)• Passive Smoking (Yin et al, 2007)• Wood Dust (Jacobsen et al, 2007)• Particulate Matter (Down et al, 2007)• Grain Dust (Paawa et al, 2007)


Trends in SEER Incidence Rates by Primary Cancer Site 1973 - 1990

-34.8-28.8-24.8

-10.2-9.5-8.3-4.7

0.22.14.39.29.510.212.1

18.320.421.123.8

33.748.7

65.584.989.5

110.5

-150 -100 -50 0 50 100 150

Lung (Female)Melanomas of Skin

ProstateNon-Hodgkin’s

TestesLiver & Intrahep

Kidney/RenalBrain

Breast (Female)Thyroid

All CancersEsophagus

Urinary BladderMultiple Myeloma

Lung (Males)Ovary

Colon/RectumLarynx

Oral Cav & PhynxHodgkin’sPancreasLeukemiaStomach

Corpus&Uterus,NOSCervix Uteri


Obesity

• Increased Asthma Severity (Taylor et al, 2008)

• GERD (Choi et al, 2008; El – Sorag et al, 2007)


GERD

• High Correlation with IPF (Raghu et al, 2006; Salvioli et al, 2006)

• Highly Related to Asthma, Chronic Cough, Hoarseness (Multiple References)


Occupational Respiratory Health Program Impact

• Infectious Disease Plan– Written Program– Targeted TB Testing– Travel Considerations– Quarantine, Masks

• Medical Monitoring and Surveillance– Baseline Exams– Modification in PFT Parameters– Immune System Markers– Biomarkers


Occupational Respiratory Health Program Impact

• Worker Placement Considerations– Continued Exposure when Occupational

Respiratory Disease Present– Placement Medical Standards– FMLA for Chronic Respiratory Conditions– ADA Reasonable Accommodations


Occupational Respiratory Health Program Impact (Cont’d)

• Health Trend Analysis– Integration of HB, MMS, Internal “Sensor” Reporting, OSHA, WC and other Data

• Personal/Occupational Risk Factor Reduction and Control– Weight, Smoking, Aerobic Conditioning– Enhance COPD, ILD, Allergy, RAD, GERD Disease

Management– Reconsider Standard Toxicity Testing Approaches– Enhance Exposure Modeling – Peaks, Epidemiologic

Considerations– Setting “Internal” Exposure Standards


What is a Work-Based Medical Evaluation?

An historical assessment, physical/functional examination and laboratory/procedure evaluation of a worker or a person to whom a job offer has been extended, potential employee to determine their functional work status, potential adverse work-related exposures. Additional purposes may include assessment of personal risk factors and identification of health promotion needs.


Types of Occupational Medical Examinations

• Exposure Driven (Medical Monitoring and Surveillance)

• Placement– Initial Hire– Periodic Fitness for Duty– Occupational and Non-occupational RTW

• Regulatory Required (PPE, HAZWOPER, DOT, FAA)


Types of Occupational Medical Examinations (Cont’d)

• Legally-focused (IMEs for WC, Litigation)

• Health Promotion for Health Risk Factor Identification

• Health Care Cost Containment in Disease Management


Risk

• As expressed in patient evaluations, or in laws, semi-quantitative

• “Low”, or “Moderate”, and “High” risk, usually definitions are not stated


Risk (Cont’d)

• Inexact guesses, based on:?– Science (?) (literature, scientific studies)– Consensus (?) (published position paper)– Experience (?) (limited, anecdotal, biased)

• If we are honest, most risk assessment in real patient evaluations is based on the anecdotal EXPERIENCE of the physician


Risk: Legal StandardAmericans with Disabilities Act

• Employer may require that the worker Not pose a direct threat to Self or Others High Probability (not clearly defined) of specific Substantial Harm (not ↑ symptoms) that is imminent (< 3 months, not future)

• Based on Objective Medical Evidence related to the particular individual

• Law & Definitions will differ in different countries


Risk: Probability under ADA

• As expressed in patient evaluations, or in laws, semi-quantitative

• “Low”, “Moderate”, and “High” risk, definitions not clearly stated

• Inexact guesses

High = Probable Direct Threat (usually, if significant harm is imminent)

Moderate = Possible Direct Threat (usually not) Low = Remote Chance of Direct Threat

(rarely)


Risk with Return to Work:Of What Consequence?

• Objectively verifiable, serious, single incident.

Examples: Disc Herniation, Myocardial Infarction

• Objectively verifiable, but less immediately serious

Example: Increase in Pre-existing Hypertension

• Subjective: Not verifiable

Example: Increase in current Back Pain


Cardiology:Return to Work Post - MI

• “Following both myocardial infarction and myocardial revascularization, symptomatic and functional improvement correlate poorly with the return to work and resumption of pre-illness lifestyle, with psychosocial status appearing as a more important determinant.”

Hurst’s The Heart, 9th Edition (1998), McGraw Hill page 1628 (0-07-912951-X)


Possible Examination Sites

Onsite Mobile Vans

Onsite Provider (MD, PT, RN, Med Tech, PA)

Clinic based

Hospital based


What is the Magic Number for Exam Periodicity?

Traditional Approach – Annual or Per Regulatory Requirements where Applicable

New Approach -- Functional Data for Decision Making (and Regulatory)


What is the Magic Combination of Exam Components?

Traditional Approach -- Multiphasic Screening (SMAC, CBC, PFTs, Visual, Audio, CXR, Urine, Hx, PE)

New Approach -- Functional Information and

Exposure Specific Assessment (functional physical assessment and biological monitoring)

Tiered Structured (age, risk factors such as

smoking, etc.)


Recent Pre-Employment Evaluation Study (Moshe et al, 2008)

WC Workers and Laborers Type of Evaluation Restriction Rate (%)

- OP examination 2.1 - GP exam with OP MR Review 1.2 - OHQ with OP Review 2.3 Highest Restriction Rates - 50 yo and higher 3.6 (CV and MS)


Decisions, Decisions, Decisions (The Real Value in Medical

Examinations)

• Right person for the job without increased, significant, near-term, material harm/injury

• Time away from work

• Restrictions

• Reaching MMI


Decisions, Decisions, Decisions (The Real Value in Medical

Examinations) – (Cont’d)

• Diagnostic Criteria

• Evidence-based treatment protocols

• Information that management CAN and will USE


Current Decision Making Criteria/Rationale

• Treat 'em and Street 'em

• No evidence-based criteria

• Little training even for Occ Docs

• Fear of making "THE CALL"


Real World Dataon MDs Certifying Disability

• W Zinn, et al; Physician perspective on the ethical aspects of disability determination J Gen Intern Med 1996; 11 (9): 525-532

• Survey:– 184 Internists and FPs (Random Sample, RS)

(53% of 347), and– 76 “Neighborhood Health Center” (NHC) MDs

(76% of 100)

• Physician willingness to exaggerate clinical data to help a patient he/she thought was deserving of disability– 39% of Random Sample MDs– 56% of NHD MDs


Similar to Prior Study

• 87% of cases in which primary care physicians could not justify “sick-listing” certification, a certification was issued anyway.

– L England & K Svardsudd; Sick-listing habits among general practioners in a Swedish county. Scand J Prim Health Care 2000; 18: 81-86


Ethics?JAMA 2000; 283; 1858-1865

• Random sample questionnaire of 1124 MDs• Use of 3 “tactics” to help patient get health

insurance coverage/permission:– Exaggerated complain severity– Changed billing diagnosis– Reported signs or symptoms patient didn’t have

• 39% of MDs has used at least on “tactic” “sometimes” or more often in the last year.

• Use unrelated to worry about prosecution for fraud.

• 54% reported using these tactics more frequently than 5 years ago.


Medical Evaluations – The Right "Flow Process"

• Approach – Job Specific Functionality• Decision Criteria - Medical Standards• Managerially "Doable" - Preset

Restrictions/RJAs• Systems Integrated

• Real Time Designations• Real Time Communication• Real Time Decisions• Real Time Oversight• Real Time Expert Validation

• Regulatory Compliant/Evidence-Based - ADA, FMLA, OSHA, EPA, DOT, ACOEM


About SOMA

• Celebrating 25 years, founded in 1983• Nationally recognized staff

– Industry, Regulatory, Research and Academic Experience

• Advanced information technology solutions• State-of-the-art equipment and facilities• Evidence-based practices

– Occupational Health and Ergonomics– Industrial Hygiene and Toxicology– Safety


SOMAVIP Suite Vision

A comprehensive Occupational and Environmental Health Suite of services and

tools designed to extend clients’ Occupational Safety, Health and Hygiene

Program Implementation and Management


SOMAVIP Suite Vision

• Corporate targets for healthful and safe workplace

– Big Picture View• Occupational Health (Exam Management,

Medical Standards, Medical Case Management, Wellness)

• Industrial Hygiene (Exposure Sampling, Exposure Risk Reduction)

• Safety Management (Incident, Audit, Training, Trends)

– Consistent Approach (i.e. Risk Type and Analysis) with documented strategy


Components of an Exam Management and Quality Assurance Program

• Medical standards for job classes• Examination Program • Web-based exam tracking and notification

system-SOMAVIP-OH• Medical review by occupational health

specialists for all exams• Follow-up by occupational health specialists

for abnormal exams


Medical Standards for Job Classes

• Specific job classes for defined work • Based on job descriptions and field

analysis• Describe in terms of functional categories • Job functions are ranked according to

demand level


MEDICAL STANDARD MATRIX

Company: XYZ Corporation

Job Class 1 – PMHE Warehouse Distribution: Material Handler, Warehouse Distribution, Receiving Clerk, Inventory Clerk, STET Clerk, Warehouse Attendant, Order-Picker Replenishment, Material Handler Shipping, Material Handler Receiving, Material Handler Turrett Driver, M. U. V. Coordinator, Bulk Storeman, High Racker Driver, Fork Lift Driver, Warehouse Keeper, Block Puller, Shipping and Receiving Worker, Raw Materials Warehouse Keeper

Job Summary: Manual and Vehicular transport/ inspection/receiving/shipping of product and materials within warehouse facility departments

Length of a Normal Shift (In Hours): 8 hrs/day; 40 hr. week; optional overtime; some 4 hours shifts at select locations.

ESSENTIAL JOB FUNCTIONSTRANSPORT: Operation of forklifts to transport product within facility; also may use hand trucks, hi/lo, transporter, hand jack, pallet jack, handcart, drum handcart, motorized picker with lifter, motorized transporter, and manual lifting for retrieval or placement of product. Work is performed in variable indoor conditions . RETRIEVE: Travel along aisles and/or throughout facility and between pallets, racks, conveyors, trucks, trailers, to place and retrieve product and equipment, using up to full arm reach, and in areas of limited access; work at heights; use of hand tools and equipment to retrieve and package product; placement or inspection of appropriate marker on product for inventory. Completion of job tasks performed according to specified performance requirements. TRANSFER: Manual transport of product to and from stock areas and pallets; retainment of order sheet during product selection; use of personal protective equipment as required. IDENTIFY: Visual determination of product placement and retrieval based on written and verbal instructions; use of computer to provide shipping/receiving instructions. COMMUNICATE: Recognition of auditory sounds and signals; verbal communication; observe written symbols; individual work performed with coordination with coworkers to ensure task completion.

Functional Categories Rank Job-Specific Data Requirements Does NOT Meet Requirements

(Check Those that apply)

A. Physical Forces (lift, carry, push/pull)

2 Transport, Retrieve, Transfer: Max. lift 50 lbs, avg. lift < 25 lbs.; carry 20-40 ft. max.; push/pull 30 lbs.

Arms, legs, neck, back ROM, strength, endurance for moderate lifting/pushing/pulling; hernia concern; chronic musculoskeletal stable

___NO

B. Lower Extremity (postures, balance - squat, stoop, crouch, etc.)

3 Retrieve, Transfer: Squat, stoop, crouch, kneel; work in limited space; use foot pedals for driving; may work at heights when using equipment for retrieval or placement of product.

Leg ROM, strength, endurance for squat, stoop, crouch, kneel (P); balance (P)

___NO

C. Locomotion (walk, climb, jump, run)

3 Retrieve, Transfer: Walk, climb to move product.

Back and leg ROM, strength, endurance for walking (F); climbing (I)

___NO

D. Upper Extremity (movement, coordination - grip/ grasp, repetition, reaching, etc.)

2 Transport, Retrieve, Transfer: Grip/grasp, pinch; object transfer, reach, overhead reach, fine motor coordination; repetition, full motion hand/wrist

Arm ROM, strength, endurance for object transfer, reach, pinch, gross motor (P); grip/grasp full reach (F);Overhead reach (I)

___NO

E. Back/Neck Postures (bending, twisting/ turning)

2 Transport, Retrieve, Transfer, Identify: Bend, twist/turn to perform warehouse duties/use material handling devices.

Back/neck ROM, strength, endurance for bending, twist/turning (P)

___NO

F. Standing/Sitting 2 Transport, Retrieve, Transfer: Stand; sit (forklift operation)

Leg and back strength, endurance for standing (C); sitting (I)

___NO


Functional Categories Rank Job Specific Tasks Requirements Meets Requirements

G. Special Senses (visual, hearing, touch, taste-smell)

Transport, Identify, Communicate: Product identification and retrieval, observe written instructions; verbal communication, auditory signal recognition, computer use, work around moving equipment, operate controls.

* Use job-specific colors to test color vision if applicable

3 Vision Distant Objects: 20/40 Better Eye, Field 125o; *Color vision if applicable

___NO

3 Hearing Speech, Warning Sounds: 40 dB .5,1,2 Better Ear ___NO

4 Tactile Tactile: Object Recognition ___NO

5 Taste-Smell No requirements ___NO

H. Mental Activities Transport, Identify, Communicate: Task performance by standards; coworker interaction

___NO

3 Attention/Cognition LOC risk (N/D/C) low; verbal/visual analysis, judgment (F) ___NO

3 Social Interaction No active psychosis; group work (F) ___NO

I. Aerobic 3 Retrieve, Transfer: Physical work performed in variable indoor conditions

Moderate: NYHA Class I; ATS Grade 0 ___NO

J. Environment (ambient conditions, environmental factors)

3 Transport, Retrieve, Identify: Indoor variable temperatures, may be extreme; vibration; reduced lighting; protective equipment

Indoor variable (C) ___NO

K. Work Schedule 3 All: Up to 8 hours/day, 40 hours per week Overtime Optional ___NO

L. Medical Conditions/ Special Regulatory Requirement

3 All: Medical conditions stable; pregnancy considerations (ACOG); personal protective equipment use

No undiagnosed or unstable condition; no restricting medication effect; potential pregnancy limitations for job performance

___NO

KEY:C = 100% of shift LOC = loss of consciousness F = 25-50% of shift ROM = range of motion P = >50%, less than 100% N/D/C = neurologic, diabetic, cardiac I = <25% of shift NYHA = New York Heart Association functional scale ATS = American Thoracic Society breathlessness scale ACOG = American College of Obstetrics pregnancy guidelines

RANK STRUCTURE:Rank 1 - most demanding/maximal capacity

↓2↓

Rank 3 – average demand/capacity↓4↓

Rank 5 - least demanding/minimal or no capacity


Examination Program

• Standardized examination forms (“packet”)• PDF Format• Systematic process for various exam types• Results (forms containing personal health

information) are separate from other personnel documents


Web-based exam tracking and notification system-SOMAVIP-OH

• Schedule notification & tracking• Automated form creation (PDF) • Status management with notes• Automated Email notifications • Updated online resources: Manuals, Forms,

Bulletins


Medical Review

• Quality checks against medical standards

• Review by trained specialists for every examination


SOMAVIP-OH

Schedule Exam

Medical Examination and Quality Assurance Process

ClinicFaxReceived

Review Against Protocol

Quality Assurance

Checks

Status Update

Recommendation


SOMA Review

• Clinic results received via e-fax (electronic faxing with privacy protection)

• Exam evaluated against medical standards• Recommendation provided • Email update for each action • Abnormal exams require further clarification


Occupational Medical Evaluation – Return to Work Review Criteria

• Identification of "problem cases" for potential evaluation:– Represented by an attorney– Significant prior claim history– Inappropriate injury behavior/unsupported pain – Severe trauma/fracture– Noncompliance with treatment plan– Treatment duration - more than 4 Physicians Visits– Specialist involvement– Treatment “outside” of the established network– Not seen by physician for extended period of time– ER visit/personal choice of physician (bounce out)– Off work/lost time– Restrictions of 5 pounds or less weight limit– No verifiable diagnosis– Prolonged/delayed recovery


Occupational Medical Evaluation – Return to Work Review Criteria (Cont’d)

• Common "Problem" Diagnoses– Recurrent Low Back Condition(s)– Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy– Myofascitis/Myofascial Syndrome– Spondylolisthesis/Spondylitis– Scoliosis– Carpal Tunnel Syndrome– Thoracic Outlet Syndrome– Degenerative Joint Disease/Other Arthritis– Post‑traumatic or Other Stress Syndrome– Heart, Respiratory or Other Organ Disease– Cumulative Trauma Disorders/Repetitive Motion– Chemical Sensitivities– Indoor Air Problems/Chemical Exposure– Occupational Respiratory Disorders/Asthma


Operational Hints: Comments are read from top to bottom.

DescriptionCancelled-Closes exam-used by both SOMA and the site user may originate from a cancelled exam or no activity for several weeks.

Cleared-Meets Medical Standards-closes and exam-used by SOMA, indicates that exam findings meet established requirements.

Cleared with Respirator-closes and exam, used by SOMA, indicates medical clearance and respirator clearance.

Cleared with Restrictions-closes an exam, used by SOMA, indicates clearance with restrictions.


Client Cleared-No SOMA QC-closes and exam, used by SOMA, indicates that an individual is working, but the exam may not have bee completed or conducted.

Clinic Delay-informational, does not close an exam-indicates that an exam has not been received by SOMA, or there may be missing information.

Clinic Fax Received-informational does not close and exam-indicates that the packet has been received by SOMA.

Communication-informational, does not close an exam, indicates information about the exam.

Deferred-informational, does not close an exam, indicates that further medical evaluation is required.

Escalated for review-informational, does not close an exam, indicates that physician review is required.


Thank You For Your Interest

“ Celebrating 25 Years…We invite you to visit our website at www.somaonline.com”

2008 occupational medical update: new millennium challenges for occupational respiratory...

Documents

occupational medical

human respiratory system

medical examinations

new millennium challenges

asse howard

cardiac i