Occupational diseases in persons with prolonged sick leave. Extent and notification
Rasmussen, K.; Sabroe, S.; Madsen, S.V.; Bach, B.
Ugeskrift for Laeger 150(2): 76-80
1988
ISSN/ISBN: 0041-5782 PMID: 3376277 Document Number: 323871
In cases of prolonged disease in wage-earners, it is the general practitioner's duty to complete certificates for the patient to obtain sick-day maintenance allowances, at the request of the social authorities. The form DP 355 is most commonly employed for this purpose in Denmark. It is normally completed first after sick-leave for three months. During a period of three months in 1986, general pactitioners in the Municipality of Arhus [Denmark] were requested to complete a questionnaire simultaneously with the sick-day maintenance allowance certificate. In this questionnaire, practitioners were requested, together with the diagnoses, to state whether they considered that the disease was occupationally-conditioned and whether the condition had been notified to the National Labour Inspection and to the Insurance Board. If the condition had not been notified, the reasons for this should be stated. The investigation comprised 1,221 sick-day maintenance cases and 91.4% of the practitioners replied. The prevalence of the total occupationally-conditioned cases of sick-leave was 165 persons (13.5%) with at least one definite occupationally-conditioned disease and 283 persons (23.2%) with at least one definite or possible occupationally-conditioned disease. Practitioners are only obliged to notify occupational disease. This includes proven and suspected cases of occupationally-conditioned disease. The employer is responsible for notification of occupational accidents. If accidents are excluded, the prevalence of occupationally conditioned disease was found to be 11.7% definite and 22.5% definite and possible occupationally-conditioned cases. 60% of the conditions considered to be occupationally-conditioned had been notified to the insurance authorities or the National Labour Inspection as compared with 40% for the cases considered to be definitely or possibly occupationally-conditioned. The commonest reasons fro absence of notification were stated to be "doubt as to whether the condition was occupationally-conditioned (not included in the insurance list of occupationally-conditioned diseases") and "notification has not been discussed with the patient". Diseases and accidents involving the musculoskeletal system constitute the largest group and these conditions are most frequently considered to be occupationally-conditioned. 41% of the diseases of the musculoskeletal system were considered to be connected with occupational influences and, where accidents involving the musculoskeletal system were concerned, the figure was 28%. Where skin disease was concerned, the corresponding figure was 39%, for disease in the nervous system 27% and for pulmonary disease 25%.