You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Original research
Occupational health, frontline workers and COVID-19 lockdown: new gender-related inequalities?
  1. Mireia Utzet1,2,3,
  2. Amaia Bacigalupe4,5,
  3. Albert Navarro6,7
  1. 1 Center for Research in Occupational Health (CISAL), Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona, Spain
  2. 2 CIBER of Epidemiology and Public Health (CIBERESP), Barcelona, Spain
  3. 3 IMIM, Parc Salut Mar, Barcelona, Spain
  4. 4 Department of Sociology and Social Work, University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), 48940 Leioa, Spain
  5. 5 Social Determinants of Health and Demographic Change-OPIK Research Group, University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), 48940 Leioa, Spain
  6. 6 Research Group on Psychosocial Risks, Organization of Work and Health (POWAH), Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, Cerdanyola del Vallès, Spain
  7. 7 Unitat de Bioestadística, Facultat de Medicina, Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, Cerdanyola del Vallès, Spain
  1. Correspondence to Dr Mireia Utzet, Center for Research in Occupational Health (CISAL), Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona 08003, Spain; mireia.utzet{at}upf.edu

Abstract

Introduction The abrupt onset of COVID-19, with its rapid spread, has had brutal consequences in all areas of society, including the workplace. In this paper, we report the working conditions, health, and tranquilisers and opioid analgesics use of workers during the first months of the ensuing pandemic, according to whether they were frontline workers or not and also according to sex.

Methods Our analysis is based on cross-sectional survey data (collected during April and May 2020) from the wage-earning population in Spain (n=15 070). We estimate prevalences, adjusted prevalence differences and adjusted prevalence ratios by sex and according to whether the worker is a frontline worker or not.

Results Employment and working conditions, exposure to psychosocial risks, as well as health status and the consumption of tranquilisers and opioid analgesics all showed sex and sectoral (frontline vs non-frontline) inequalities, which placed essential women workers in a particularly vulnerable position. Moreover, the consumption of tranquilisers and opioid analgesics increased during the pandemic and health worsened significantly among frontline women workers.

Conclusions The exceptional situation caused by the COVID-19 pandemic provides an opportunity to revalue essential sectors and to dignify such employment and working conditions, especially among women. There is an urgent need to improve working conditions and reduce occupational risk, particularly among frontline workers. In addition, this study highlights the public health problem posed by tranquilisers and opioid analgesics consumption, especially among frontline women.

  • COVID-19
  • occupational health
  • mental health

Data availability statement

Data are available on reasonable request. Data are available on resonable request.

This article is made freely available for personal use in accordance with BMJ’s website terms and conditions for the duration of the covid-19 pandemic or until otherwise determined by BMJ. You may use, download and print the article for any lawful, non-commercial purpose (including text and data mining) provided that all copyright notices and trade marks are retained.

https://bmj.com/coronavirus/usage

http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jech-2021-217692

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Data availability statement

    Data are available on reasonable request. Data are available on resonable request.

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors MU and AB conceived the idea of the paper. AN verified and provided the data. AN and MU were responsible for the analysis of data. AB and MU were responsible for a first interpretation of data. All authors wrote a first draft of the paper. All authors read and approved the final manuscript. All authors are guarantors.

    • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

    • Competing interests None declared.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

    • Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.