Rank: Forum user 
|
An employee has been diagnosed with asthma from a work related process. He had asthma previously as a kid although was not showing any symptoms when he joined the company.
Independent doctor says the onset is due to work process.
Work doctor says not RIDDOR as it was a pre-existing condition.
I've never heard of this as a reason not to report, what do members think?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
Where work exposes employees to asthmagens, then pre employment medical screening would commonly exclude persons with preexisting asthma or other respiratory conditions. Exposure to a respiratory sensitiser may provoke an asthma attack in someone who already suffers from asthma or it may provoke a specific response includiing occupational asthma.
If the individual has been symptom free for a long time before employment, then exposure at work has brought on symptoms, it would be my belief the exposure caused the symptoms. It is reportable... But it may be open to otheir interpretations. Proper diagnosis would require very specialised medical knowledge which is extremely rare. Few if any GPs have the knowledge, and even very few OH physicians....
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Steve...hear what you are saying but if you operate on that premise you would Report everything...it would have to be case by case and as we don't have the full employee history I would go with the Doctors recommendation.
http://www.hse.gov.uk/ri...ccupational-diseases.htm
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Interesting points, the HSE page says if it's a pre-existing condition that has flared up due to work then its reportable.
The doctor who diagnosed it is Dr Burke chest and respiratory expert at Birmingham. The one that said its not reportable is a GP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
Also meant to say the last time he had symptoms was as an 8 year old and he's now in his 40's.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
How does the works doctor know its a pre-existing condition? It is possible to have two or more separate reactions to different allergens.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
When he was a child he did not have occupational asthma.
An expert says he now does.
How can it be pre -existing?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user 
|
If the person hasn't suffered from systems for over 32 years and then starts thenthere is something he is doing. You say yourself that they are exposed. This is reportable and if the person puts in a claim I would suggest even an independant Dr will find in his favour so hiding it now has no benefits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Sorry safety witch was you who said he was exposed it was the next posting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
I agree it should be reported.
Thanks for the comments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Super forum user
|
Many years ago I discussed this topic with a leading immunologist. His comment was that if the childhood asthma had resolved itself and he had been free for a number of years, then the new outbreak was almost certainly due to recent sensitisation to something that probably had nothing to do with the childhood problem. However, the first step in dealing with this would need to be to conduct appropriate tests to establish what the causative substance was. It has happened that a case of asthma was assumed to be occupational. Subsequent tests showed that it was due to a non-occupational exposure. So reporting this on the assumption that it is occupational without at least at the same time commencing the proper clinical investigation could raise complex issues.
As many know, my major interest is in preventing occupational skin disease. The same principles apply.
Consider these two cases. 1. Diagnosed by the dermatologist as occupational allergic contact dermatitis due to formaldehyde in the workplace. Investigation revealed no exposure to the formaldehyde. Investigation finally revealed facial rash due to diet. 2. Diagnosis of occupational allergic contact dermatitis to nickel in a lady handling nickel plated components. Investigation revealed that none of the components she handled was releasing nickel, so diagnosis clinically accurate but occupationally irrelevant. Real cause was irritant contact dermatitis due to part time work as a hair stylist.
Chris
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Forum user
|
It is ill health that has been brought on by work practices. Definitely reportable but you can send the employee for an independent medical.
If in doubt contact your local authority.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.