Pesticide knowledge, practice and attitude and how it affects the health of small-scale farmers in Uganda: A cross-sectional study

Background: Over the past years there has been an increase in the use of pesticides in developing countries. This study describes pesticide use among small-scale farmers in Uganda and analyses predictors of pesticide poisoning (intoxication) symptoms.Method: A cross-sectional study was conducted using a standardized questionnaire. Some 317 small-scale farmers in two districts in Uganda were interviewed about pesticide use, knowledge and attitude, symptoms of intoxication, personal protective equipment (PPE) and hygiene. The risk of reporting symptoms was analysed using logistic regression analysis.Results: The most frequently used pesticides belonged to WHO class II. The farmers had poor knowledge about pesticide toxicity, and the majority did not use appropriate PPE nor good hygiene when handling pesticides. There was no significant association between the number of times of spraying with pesticides and self-reported symptoms of pesticide poisoning. The only significant association was between blowing and sucking the nozzle of the knapsack sprayer and self-reported symptoms of pesticide intoxication (OR: 2.13. 95% CI: 1.09 – 4.18).Conclusion: Unlike the practice in several other developing countries, small-scale farmers in Uganda do not use the most hazardous pesticides (WHO class 1a and 1b). However use of WHO class II pesticides and those of lower toxicity is seen in combination with inadequate knowledge and practice among the farmers. This poses a danger of acute intoxications, chronic health problems and environmental pollution. Training of farmers in Integrated Pest Management (IPM) methods, use of proper hygiene and personal protective equipment when handling pesticides should be promoted.Keywords: acute pesticides poisoning (intoxication), small-scale farmers, developing country, knowledge, attitude and practice

Dust exposure and chronic respiratory symptoms among coffee curing workers in Kilimanjaro: a cross sectional study

Coffee processing causes organic dust exposure which may lead to development of respiratory symptoms. Previous studies have mainly focused on workers involved in roasting coffee in importing countries. This study was carried out to determine total dust exposure and respiratory health of workers in Tanzanian primary coffee-processing factories. A cross sectional study was conducted among 79 workers in two coffee factories, and among 73 control workers in a beverage factory. Personal samples of total dust (n = 45 from the coffee factories and n = 19 from the control factory) were collected throughout the working shift from the breathing zone of the workers. A questionnaire with modified questions from the American Thoracic Society questionnaire was used to assess chronic respiratory symptoms. Differences between groups were tested by using independent t-tests and Chi square tests. Poisson Regression Model was used to estimate prevalence ratio, adjusting for age, smoking, presence of previous lung diseases and years worked in dusty factories. All participants were male. The coffee workers had a mean age of 40 years and were older than the controls (31 years). Personal total dust exposure in the coffee factories were significantly higher than in the control factory (geometric mean (GM) 1.23 mg/m3, geometric standard deviation (GSD) (0.8) vs. 0.21(2.4) mg/m3). Coffee workers had significantly higher prevalence than controls for cough with sputum (23% vs. 10%; Prevalence ratio (PR); 2.5, 95% CI 1.0-5.9) and chest tightness (27% vs. 13%; PR; 2.4, 95% CI 1.1-5.2). The prevalence of morning cough, cough with and without sputum for 4 days or more in a week was also higher among coffee workers than among controls. However, these differences were not statistically significant. Workers exposed to coffee dust reported more respiratory symptoms than did the controls. This might relate to their exposure to coffee dust. Interventions for reduction of dust levels and provision of respiratory protective equipment are recommended