Respiratory and skin health among glass microfiber production workers: a cross-sectional study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Only a few studies have investigated non-malignant respiratory effects of glass microfibers and these have provided inconsistent results. Our objective was to assess the effects of exposure to glass microfibers on respiratory and skin symptoms, asthma and lung function.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A cross-sectional study of 102 workers from a microfiber factory (response rate 100%) and 76 office workers (73%) from four factories in Thailand was conducted. They answered a questionnaire on respiratory health, occupational exposures, and lifestyle factors, and performed spirometry. Measurements of respirable dust were available from 2004 and 2005.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Workers exposed to glass microfibers experienced increased risk of cough (adjusted OR 2.04), wheezing (adjOR 2.20), breathlessness (adjOR 4.46), nasal (adjOR 2.13) and skin symptoms (adjOR 3.89) and ever asthma (adjOR 3.51), the risks of breathlessness (95%CI 1.68–11.86) and skin symptoms (1.70–8.90) remaining statistically significant after adjustment for confounders. There was an exposure-response relation between the risk of breathlessness and skin symptoms and increasing level of microfiber exposure. Workers exposed to sensitizing chemicals, including phenol-formaldehyde resin, experienced increased risk of cough (3.43, 1.20–9.87) and nasal symptoms (3.07, 1.05–9.00).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>This study provides evidence that exposure to glass microfibers increases the risk of respiratory and skin symptoms, and has an exposure-response relation with breathlessness and skin symptoms. Exposure to sensitizing chemicals increased the risk of cough and nasal symptoms. The results suggest that occupational exposure to glass microfibers is related to non-malignant adverse health effects, and that implementing exposure control measures in these industries could protect the health of employees.</p

Smoking and lung function among adults with newly onset asthma

Introduction Smoking increases the risk of asthma and reduces lung function among subjects with and without asthma. We assessed the effects of smoking on lung function reflecting both central and small airways among adults with newly onset asthma. Methods In a population-based study, 521 (response rate 86%) working-aged adults with clinically defined newly diagnosed asthma answered a questionnaire on personal smoking and other factors potentially influencing lung function, and performed spirometry. We applied multiple linear regression analysis to estimate the relations between smoking and lung function adjusting for confounding. Results Among asthmatics, FEV1 level was reduced significantly, on average 208 mL, related to regular smoking (adjusted effect estimate -0.208, 95% CI -0.355 to -0.061) and 245 mL in relation to former smoking, that is, among those who quit less than a year ago (-0.245, 95% CI -0.485 to -0.004). In contrast, FEV1 was not significantly related to occasional smoking or former smoking among those who quit over a year ago. Forced expiratory flow (FEF) levels (L/s) were also significantly reduced among regular smokers (FEF25-75%: -0.372, 95% CI -0.607 to -0.137; FEF50%: -0.476, 95% CI -0.750 to -0.202). An exposure-response pattern related to both daily smoking rate and lifetime cumulative smoking was seen both among men and women. Conclusions This study provides new evidence that among working-aged adults with new asthma, regular smoking and former smoking reduce lung function levels with a dose-response pattern. The lung function parameters applied as outcomes reflect both larger and smaller airways.Peer reviewe

Prevalence of cold-related symptoms among Thai chicken meat industry workers:association with workplace temperature and thermal insulation of clothing

Abstract This study determined the association of cold-related symptoms with workplace temperature and thermal insulation of clothing among Thai chicken industry workers. Three hundred workers were interviewed regarding cold-related symptoms, which were regressed on worksite temperature and protective clothing. In total, 80% of workers reported respiratory symptoms; 23%, cardiac symptoms; 62%, circulation disturbances; 42%, thirst; 56%, drying of the mouth; and 82%, degradation of their performance. When adjusted for personal characteristics, respiratory symptoms were 1.1‒2.2 times more prevalent at −22‒10°C than at 10‒23°C. At −22‒10°C, cardiac symptoms increased by 45%, chest pain by 91%, peripheral circulation disturbances by 25%, and drying of the mouth by 57%. Wearing protective clothing with at least 1.1 clo units was associated with marked reductions in symptom prevalence. Therefore, temperatures lower than 10°C increased prevalence of cold-related symptoms, which are largely preventable by appropriate clothing use

Cold-related symptoms and performance degradation among Thai poultry industry workers with reference to vulnerable groups:a cross-sectional study

Abstract Background: Few studies have examined cold-related symptoms among cold workplace workers in Thailand. This study aimed to determine the prevalence of cold-related cardiorespiratory, circulatory, and general symptoms and performance degradation among Thai chicken industry workers and identify vulnerable groups. Methods: Overall, 422 workers aged from 18 to 57 years at four chicken meat factories in Thailand were interviewed for cold-related symptoms and complaints. The results were expressed in terms of model-based adjusted prevalence and prevalence differences (PDs) in percentage points (pp) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results: In total, 76.1% of the respondents reported cold-related respiratory symptoms, 24.6% reported cardiac symptoms, 68.6% reported circulatory symptoms, and 72.1% reported general symptoms. In addition, 82.7% of the respondents reported performance degradation. Cold-related respiratory symptoms increased by PD 29.0 pp. (95% CI 23.4–34.6) from the lowest to the highest educational group, with a similar pattern observed in performance degradation. Forklift drivers and storage and manufacturing workers complained of cold-related respiratory symptoms more than office staff (PD 22.1 pp., 95% CI 12.8–31.3; 12.0 pp., 95% CI 2.4–21.6; and 17.5 pp., 95% CI 11.5–23.6, respectively); they also reported more performance degradation (PD 24.1 pp., 95% CI 17.0–31.2; 19.8 pp., 95% CI 14.1–25.6; and 14.8 pp., 95% CI 8.0–22.6, respectively). Weekly alcohol consumers reported more performance problems owing to cold (PD 18.2 pp., 95% CI 13.9–22.6) than non-consumers of alcohol. Cardiac and circulation symptoms were more common in women than men (PD 10.0 pp., 95% CI 1.1–18.9; and 8.4 pp., 95% CI 0.5–16.4, respectively). The age trend in performance issues was curved, with the highest prevalence among those aged 35–44 years, while the oldest workers (45–57 years) perceived less cold-related symptoms, particularly thirst. Conclusions: Cold-related symptoms and performance degradation were found to be common in this industry, with vulnerable groups comprising of highly educated workers, forklift drivers, storage and manufacturing workers, weekly alcohol consumers, aging workers, and women. The results demonstrate a need for further research on the adequacy of protection provided against the cold, particularly given that global warming will increase the contrast between cold workplaces and outdoor heat

Self-assessed threshold temperature for cold among poultry industry workers in Thailand

Abstract The self-assessed threshold temperature for cold in the workplace is not well known. We asked 392 chicken industry workers in Thailand what they regard as the cold threshold (CT) and compared subgroups of workers using linear and quantile regressions by CT sextiles (percentiles P₁₇, P₃₃, P₅₀, P₆₇, and P₈₃, from warmest to coldest). The variables of interest were sex, office work, and sedentary work, with age, clothing thermal insulation, and alcohol consumption as adjustment factors. The mean CT was 14.6 °C. Office workers had a 6.8 °C higher mean CT than other workers, but the difference ranged from 3.8 °C to 10.0 °C from P₁₇ to P₈₃. Sedentary workers had a 2.0 °C higher mean CT than others, but the difference increased from 0.5 °C to 3.0 °C through P₁₇–P₈₃. The mean CT did not differ between sexes, but men had a 1.6–5.0 °C higher CT at P₁₇–P₅₀ (&gt;20 °C) and a 5.0 °C lower CT at P₈₃ (&lt;10 °C). The CT was relatively high at warm (≥10 °C), dry (relative humidity &lt;41%), and drafty (air velocity &gt; 0.35 m/s) worksites. We conclude that office, sedentary, and female workers and those working at warm, dry, and draughty sites are sensitive to the coldest temperatures, whereas male workers are sensitive even to moderate temperatures