• M M Riva, Marisa Santini, and G Mosconi.
• Unità Operativa Ospedaliera Medicina del Lavoro, Azienda Ospedaliera Ospedali Riuniti di Bergamo. mriva@ospedaliriuniti.bergamo.it
• Med Lav. 2009 Nov 1; 100 (6): 417-25.

Background And ObjectivesThe authors analyze the results of the clinical assessment of patients suffering from suspected work-related muscular-skeletal disorders (WMSDs), observed during the course of 2008 in the Department of Occupational Medicine of the Ospedali Riuniti hospital in Bergamo. The aim was to analyse the appropriateness of the requests of clinical consultation, comparing the cases sent by general practitioners and by occupational physicians.MethodsWe assessed 149 patients (mean age 47 years, DS 9.4; mean work seniority 29.5 years, DS 10.2), investigating 218 disorders in different muscular-skeletal segments. The majority of patients (63.7%) for whom a clinical consultation was requested were sent by general practitioners, 32.9% by occupational physicians, 3.4% by the National Insurance Institute for Occupational Accidents and Diseases (INAIL). The assessment was made in two steps: first a clinical and instrumental definition of the disorders, prescribing the necessary medical investigations were the diagnosis was not already clear; secondly a definition of the aetiology, requesting documentation about working conditions when this was not clear from the medical history, experience and literature, or making an inspection.ResultsA majority of the patients (40.2%) were employed in the construction industry. Regarding symptoms, 54.4% of the subjects reported low back pain, 74.5% upper limb disorders (some of the patients reported several problems in different segments). The clinical diagnosis was already clear at the first consultation for 62.8% of all cases; for the other 37.2% it was necessary to prescribe some instrumental examinations or specialistic (neurologic, physiatric, orthopaedic) medical examinations. We concluded for a diagnosis of WMSDs in 99 (45.4%) of the 218 cases (50% of the assessments requested by occupational physicians, 45.3% of the assessments requested by general practitioners). The most frequent reason for rejecting an occupational aetiology was the lack of correlation between type of disease and occupational exposure, both for patients referred by occupational physicians (58.1%) and by general practitioners (51.8%).DiscussionThe results demonstrated that the appropriateness requests for clinical consultation was identical for general practitioners and occupational physicians. All physicians showed a high degree of attention for the upper limb disorders, which is a topical subject of great epidemiological interest. General practitioners and occupational physicians need to take more advantage of the diagnostic support and clinical evaluations offered by Occupational Medicine Departments and Universities for WMSDs.

34 keywords...

hide…