For Work Exhaustion, you can use Maslach Burnout Inventory. For OHS Management, PSC-12 will be good.

Медицина труда 2022 № 9 591-600

Sorokin G. A., Chistyakov N. D.

The duration of work-related fatigue as a criterion for assessing the workload and the cause of chronic diseases of workers

North-Western Scientific Center of Hygiene and Public Health of Rospotrebnadzor, St. Petersburg, Russian Federation

The developers of fatigue risk management systems in the workplace note that there is no universal definition and a consistent way to measure workload, and that the relationship between workload and fatigue has not been sufficiently studied. The purpose of this study was to analyze the impact of the workload, estimated by the duration of the state of production-related fatigue of workers, on their subjective health and the risk of chronic diseases. Materials and methods. The study involved employees in three areas of employment: healthcare (697 employees), industry (751), education (687). 4 indicators of the risk of violation of the subjective health of employees during the year were determined: the presence of chronic fatigue syndrome (Rcfs), deterioration of the employee's health during the year (Rdh), long-term illnesses during the year (Rli), fatigue accumulation during the year (Rfa). The diseases detected during periodic medical examination were analyzed. The HFweek indicator was calculated – the duration of the fatigue state – "hours of fatigue per working week": HFweek(hour)= PRN (hour) × Kdf × Kff, where: PRN (hour) is the actual duration of the working week; Kdf and Kff are coefficients that take into account the degree and frequency of fatigue. The relative risk RR was calculated. Results. It was found that with more than 25 hours per week in 108 sample groups of workers in 25 comparison cases, RR exceeded the control level by more than 5 times; in 44 comparison groups by 2.1-5 times and in 35 groups by 1.1-2.0 times. With a HFweekof more than 25 hours, there is an annual accumulation of fatigue (Rfa), similar in workers of all spheres of employment. At HFweek > 15 hours, the RR of chronic diseases of the musculoskeletal, respiratory, nervous systems and skin was in the range of 1.31-1.83. The RR of diseases of the genitourinary system (women) and endocrine system increased by 1.13 times; diseases of hypertension, digestive organs, visual system RR-1.05-1.07. Conclusions. The HFweek indicator is the physiological equivalent of the professional workload of employees in various fields of employment. With HFweek> 25 hours, there is a sharp increase in health risks.

Keywords: professional load, work fatigue, duration of fatigue, fatigue accumulation, permissible dose of fatigue, physiological equivalent of the load; subjective health, risks of chronic diseases, physiological limit.

For citation: Sorokin G. A., Chistyakov N. D. The duration of work-related fatigue as a criterion for assessing the workload and the cause of chronic diseases of workers/ Occupational medicine and industry ecology, Russian journal). (In Russian)

For correspondence: Gennady Alexandrovich Sorokin, Doctor of Biol. Sci., Leading researcher of the department of health risk analysis, North-West Public Health Research Center; 191036, Saint-Petersburg, street 2-ya Sovetskaya st., 4, Russia; e-mail: [email protected]; 8 (812) 717-00-28.

Contribution: Sorokin G. A. – the concept and design of the study, collection and processing of material, statistical processing, writing a text; Chistyakov N. D. – collection of material. Authors are responsible for the integrity of all parts of the manuscript and approval of the manuscript final version.

Conflict of interest. The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Acknowledgment. The study had no sponsorship.

Information about authors:

Sorokin G. A., https: //orcid. org/ 0000-0003-0275-0553

Chistyakov N. D., http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1881-3432

УДК 613.6; 613.7

Сорокин Г.А

REFERENCES

1. Konradi G.P., Slonim A.D., V.S. Farfel V.S. Physiology of labor / M.-L.: Biomedgiz. – 1934. – 671 p. (in Russian).

2. Sorokin G.A. Work, fatigue and occupational risk. Publishing House of the Polytechnic University, St. Petersburg, 2016. 456 p. (in Russian).

3. Fatigue Management Guide for Air Traffic Service Providers 2016.

4. Fourie C. etc. Fatigue Risk Management Systems: A Review of the Literature// September 2010 London: Clockwork Research Ltd, Department for Transport. Available from: http://www. clockworkresearch. com/publications/2010b. (дата обращения 20.09.2021).

5. Steven E, etc. Fatigue Risk Management in the Workplace //JOEM. Volume 54. Number 2. February 2012. P 231-258.

6. Sargent C. et al. The Relationships between Human Fatigue and Public Health: A Brief Commentary on Selected Papers from the 9th International Conference on Managing Fatigue in

7.Transportation, Resources and Health/ Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2016 Aug 24;13(9):842. doi: 10.3390/ijerph13090842.PMID: 27563919

8. Fatigue risk management system process guide/ 15 January 2020 https://mtt.gov.bh/sites/default/files/frms_process_guide.pdf 9. Sorokin G.A., Suslov V.L. Fatigue risk management systems in the workplace and their relevance for shipbuilding enterprises// Shipbuilding.V–2022. 2. 61-64/(in Russian).

10. Sorokin G. A. Chronophysiological study of professionally conditioned fatigue // Human physiology. 2008. No. 6. pp. 70-77. (in Russian).

11. Sorokin G. A. Normalization of labor intensity by its duration, density and pace // Occupational medicine and industrial ecology. 2001. No. 10. pp. 28-32. (in Russian).

12. Conway S.H. [et al.]. The Identification of a Threshold of Long Work Hours for Predicting Elevated Risks of Adverse Health Outcomes //Am J Epidemiol.– 2017.– Vol.186(2).– P.173-3.

13. RuguliesR et al. The effect of exposure to long working hours on depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis from the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates of the Work-related Burden of Disease and Injury// Environ Int 2021 Oct;155:106629. doi: 10.1016/j.envint.2021. 106629. Epub 2021 Jun 15.

14. Jansen N.W. [et al.]. Need for recovery in the working population: description and associations with fatigue and psychological distress// Int J Behav Med. 2002. Vol.9(4).322-40.

15. Croon E.M. [et al.]. Psychometric properties of the Need for Recovery after work scale: test-retest reliability and sensitivity to detect change //Occup Environ Med. 2006. Vol.63(3). P.202-6.

16. Wentz K. et al. Need for recovery in relation to effort from work and health in four occupations // International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health volume 93, pages243–259 (2020).

Information about authors:

Sorokin G. http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1297-5476 Sorokin Gennadiy

e-mail: sorgen50@mail/ru, tel. 8-812-7179783.

Northwest Public Health Research Center

Leading Researcher