Hassan Kheyre1, Samantha Morais1, Ana Ferro1, Ana Rute Costa1, Pedro Norton1,2, Nuno Lunet1,3, Bárbara Peleteiro4,5. 1. EPIUnit, Instituto de Saúde Pública, Universidade do Porto, Rua das Taipas 135, 4050-600, Porto, Portugal. 2. Unidade de Saúde Ocupacional, Centro de Epidemiologia Hospitalar, Centro Hospitalar de São João, Alameda Prof. Hernâni Monteiro, 4200-319, Porto, Portugal. 3. Departamento de Ciências da Saúde Pública e Forenses e Educação Médica, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade do Porto, Alameda Prof. Hernâni Monteiro, 4200-319, Porto, Portugal. 4. EPIUnit, Instituto de Saúde Pública, Universidade do Porto, Rua das Taipas 135, 4050-600, Porto, Portugal. barbarap@med.up.pt. 5. Departamento de Ciências da Saúde Pública e Forenses e Educação Médica, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade do Porto, Alameda Prof. Hernâni Monteiro, 4200-319, Porto, Portugal. barbarap@med.up.pt.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this systematic review was to describe the prevalence of Helicobacter pylori infection in specific occupational groups and to compare them with the general population. METHODS: We searched PubMed® to identify original studies reporting the prevalence of H. pylori infection in occupational groups. The differences between occupational groups and the general population were analyzed taking into account the direction and statistical significance of the differences observed when comparing each occupational group with a reference group (either recruited in the same study or using an external comparator). RESULTS: A total of 98 studies addressing the prevalence of H. pylori infection in occupational groups were included in the systematic review. Overall, health professionals showed a significantly higher prevalence of H. pylori infection than the general population, especially among those working at gastrointestinal units. Similar results were found in subjects involved in agricultural, forestry and fishery, as well as in sewage workers, miners, and workers at institutions for the intellectually disabled, although differences were less pronounced. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show an occupational risk of H. pylori infection supporting the role of oral-oral, fecal-oral, and zoonotic transmission. Studies comparing specific occupational groups with adequate comparators may contribute to better identify groups at higher risk of infection. The recognition of this infection as an occupational disease would result in early detection and treatment, as well as prevention and control of its transmission in workplaces.
PURPOSE: The aim of this systematic review was to describe the prevalence of Helicobacter pylori infection in specific occupational groups and to compare them with the general population. METHODS: We searched PubMed® to identify original studies reporting the prevalence of H. pyloriinfection in occupational groups. The differences between occupational groups and the general population were analyzed taking into account the direction and statistical significance of the differences observed when comparing each occupational group with a reference group (either recruited in the same study or using an external comparator). RESULTS: A total of 98 studies addressing the prevalence of H. pyloriinfection in occupational groups were included in the systematic review. Overall, health professionals showed a significantly higher prevalence of H. pyloriinfection than the general population, especially among those working at gastrointestinal units. Similar results were found in subjects involved in agricultural, forestry and fishery, as well as in sewage workers, miners, and workers at institutions for the intellectually disabled, although differences were less pronounced. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show an occupational risk of H. pyloriinfection supporting the role of oral-oral, fecal-oral, and zoonotic transmission. Studies comparing specific occupational groups with adequate comparators may contribute to better identify groups at higher risk of infection. The recognition of this infection as an occupational disease would result in early detection and treatment, as well as prevention and control of its transmission in workplaces.
Authors: A Gasbarrini; M Anti; F Franceschi; A Armuzzi; R Cotichini; V Ojetti; M Candelli; M E Lippi; M Paolucci; V Cicconi; G Cammarota; S Danese; N G Silveri; C Catananti; P Pola; T Stroffolini; G Gasbarrini Journal: Eur J Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2001-02 Impact factor: 2.566
Authors: P Bergenzaun; K G Kristinsson; B Thjodleifsson; E Sigvaldadottir; S Mölstad; M Held; T Wadström Journal: Scand J Gastroenterol Date: 1996-12 Impact factor: 2.423
Authors: A Ogihara; S Kikuchi; A Hasegawa; M Kurosawa; K Miki; E Kaneko; H Mizukoshi Journal: J Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2000-03 Impact factor: 4.029
Authors: Rocco Maurizio Zagari; Graham Richard Law; Lorenzo Fuccio; Paolo Pozzato; David Forman; Franco Bazzoli Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2009-12-15 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: Tracey V Lynn; Michael G Bruce; Michael Landen; Michael Beller; Lisa Bulkow; Ben Gold; Alan Parkinson Journal: Int J Circumpolar Health Date: 2007-04 Impact factor: 1.228
Authors: Chioma Adanma Nwaru; Ailiana Santosa; Stefan Franzén; Fredrik Nyberg Journal: J Epidemiol Community Health Date: 2022-01-07 Impact factor: 3.710
Authors: Giulia Collatuzzo; Giulia Fiorini; Berardino Vaira; Francesco S Violante; Andrea Farioli; Paolo Boffetta Journal: Prev Med Rep Date: 2021-08-18