Objective: To detect early subclinical signs of autonomic dysfunction in the cardiovascular system and explore the mechanism of orthostatic hypotension (OH) in patients with multiple system atrophy (MSA). Methods: Eighteen male patients with possible MSA and 10 healthy men were recruited. The hemodynamic responses to head-up tilt and tilt-reversal were studied by an electrically-powered tilt table and a non-invasive cardiac output measurement (NICOM) system. Results: At supine, there was no signifi cant difference in blood pressure, heart rate (HR), stroke volume, cardiac output and total peripheral resistance between MSA patients and healthy controls. During tilting upright, OH developed in 5 MSA patients, with a 23.7±4.8 mmHg drop in systolic blood pressure. Patients with OH were older and exhibited higher scores in unifi ed Multiple System Atrophy Rating Scale part I than patients without OH. The stroke volume, cardiac output and total peripheral resistance did not differ between groups. The controls had the most signifi cant HR elevation (6.5±2.5 bpm) during tiltup, followed by patients without OH (2.8±1.6 bpm) and those with OH (-0.2±2.2 bpm). A similar trend of HR decrease was observed during return to supine posture. The process of tilt-reversal altered HR more signifi cantly than head-up tilt in controls (8.0±2.9 vs 6.5±2.5 bpm; P=0.031) and patients without OH (4.2±2.1 vs 2.8±1.6 bpm; P=0.032), but not in patients with OH (1.2±1.5 vs -0.2±2.2 bpm; P=0.380). Conclusions: The HR change during postural challenge showed signifi cant difference between MSA patients and healthy controls. Impaired HR responsiveness contributed to OH in MSA. Monitoring HR during the tilt table test may be a practical and useful method to detect early autonomic dysfunction in patients with MSA.

Background: Despite the lack of official COVID-19 statistics, various workplaces and occupations have been at the center of COVID-19 outbreaks. We aimed to compare legal measures and governance established for managing COVID-19 infection risks at workplaces in nine Asia and Pacific countries and to recommend key administrative measures. Methods: We collected information on legal measures and governance from both general citizens and workers regarding infection risks such as COVID-19 from industrial hygiene professionals in nine countries (Indonesia, India, Japan, Malaysia, New Zealand, Republic of the Philippines, Republic of Korea, Taiwan, and Thailand) using a structured questionnaire. Results: A governmental body overseeing public health and welfare was in charge of containing the spread and occurrence of infectious diseases under an infectious disease control and prevention act or another special act, although the name of the pertinent organizations and legislation vary among countries. Unlike in the case of other traditional hazards, there have been no specific articles or clauses describing the means of mitigating virus risk in the workplace that are legally required of employers, making it difficult to define the responsibilities of the employer. Each country maintains own legal systems regarding access to the duration, administration, and financing of paid sick leave. Many workers may not have access to paid sick leave even if it is legally guaranteed. Conclusion Specific legal measures to manage infectious disease risks, such as providing proper personal protective equipment, education, engineering control measures, and paid sick leave are recommended to be stipulated in Industrial safety and health-related acts.