BACKGROUND: Persons born outside the United States are more likely to be diagnosed with tuberculosis disease (TB) than native-born individuals. Foreign-born Latinos at risk of TB may be difficult to reach with public health interventions due to cultural and institutional barriers. Workplaces employing large concentrations of foreign-born Latinos may be useful locations for TB interventions targeting this high-risk population. METHOD: This study used a two-phase approach to investigate the feasibility of workplace TB interventions. The first phase investigated employer knowledge of TB and receptiveness to allowing TB interventions in their businesses through 5 structured interviews. The second phase investigated foreign-born workers' knowledge of TB and their receptiveness to receiving TB interventions in their places of employment through 12 focus groups stratified by gender and education. RESULTS: Phase 1: Only 1 of the 5 employers interviewed had a high level of knowledge about TB, and three had no knowledge other than that TB was a disease that involved coughing. They were receptive to workplace TB interventions, but were concerned about lost productivity and customers finding out if an employee had TB. Phase 2: There was no observed differences in responses between gender and between the bottom two education groups, so the final analysis took place between a gender-combined lower education group and higher education group. The higher education group tended to have knowledge that was more accurate and to view TB as a disease associated with poverty. The lower education group tended to have more misconceptions about TB and more often expressed concern that their employers would not support worksite interventions. CONCLUSIONS: The results from both phases indicate that more TB education is needed among both foreign-born Latino workers and their employers. Obstacles to implementing workplace TB interventions include knowledge, potential productivity loss, employer liability, and perceived customer response. Published 2018. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.
BACKGROUND:Persons born outside the United States are more likely to be diagnosed with tuberculosis disease (TB) than native-born individuals. Foreign-born Latinos at risk of TB may be difficult to reach with public health interventions due to cultural and institutional barriers. Workplaces employing large concentrations of foreign-born Latinos may be useful locations for TB interventions targeting this high-risk population. METHOD: This study used a two-phase approach to investigate the feasibility of workplace TB interventions. The first phase investigated employer knowledge of TB and receptiveness to allowing TB interventions in their businesses through 5 structured interviews. The second phase investigated foreign-born workers' knowledge of TB and their receptiveness to receiving TB interventions in their places of employment through 12 focus groups stratified by gender and education. RESULTS: Phase 1: Only 1 of the 5 employers interviewed had a high level of knowledge about TB, and three had no knowledge other than that TB was a disease that involved coughing. They were receptive to workplace TB interventions, but were concerned about lost productivity and customers finding out if an employee had TB. Phase 2: There was no observed differences in responses between gender and between the bottom two education groups, so the final analysis took place between a gender-combined lower education group and higher education group. The higher education group tended to have knowledge that was more accurate and to view TB as a disease associated with poverty. The lower education group tended to have more misconceptions about TB and more often expressed concern that their employers would not support worksite interventions. CONCLUSIONS: The results from both phases indicate that more TB education is needed among both foreign-born Latino workers and their employers. Obstacles to implementing workplace TB interventions include knowledge, potential productivity loss, employer liability, and perceived customer response. Published 2018. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.
Authors: Amy L Davidow; Dolly Katz; Smita Ghosh; Henry Blumberg; Ashutosh Tamhane; Anna Sevilla; Randall Reves Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2015-07-16 Impact factor: 9.308
Authors: Anabel Rodriguez; David I Douphrate; David Gimeno Ruiz De Porras; Adriana Perez; Robert Hagevoort; Matthew Nonnenmann; Leeroy Cienega Journal: J Agromedicine Date: 2020-05-25 Impact factor: 1.992
Authors: Michael A Flynn; Pietra Check; Andrea L Steege; Jacqueline M Sivén; Laura N Syron Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-12-29 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Anabel Rodriguez; David Douphrate; David Gimeno Ruiz de Porras; Emilie Prot; Adriana Perez; Robert Hagevoort; Matthew Nonnenmann Journal: Front Public Health Date: 2020-09-02