Current topics in occupational asthma

A Qualitative Assessment of Changes in Occupational Exposures Among Healthcare Facility Workers

Adult-onset asthma, notably prevalent among healthcare professionals, especially nurses, is often attributed to occupational factors such as exposure to cleaning agents. Studies consistently underscore the substantial role of such exposure in work-related asthma among hospital staff. We aimed to (a) identify and characterize current practices in cleaning and aerosolized medication administration; (b) assess changes in practices since a similar 2003 study of Texas healthcare workers; and (c) identify factors contributing to diverse exposures within healthcare job categories. We conducted focus groups with 38 participants in 6 healthcare settings, analyzing current practices, changes since 2003, and factors contributing to exposure diversity. We used a three-step approach for data analysis, including sociodemographic characterization, a scissor-and-sort technique for exposure description, and qualitative content analysis. Participants were primarily healthcare providers (76%) and housekeepers/cleaners (11%) who reported exposure to aerosolized medications, cleaning products, adhesives, and solvents. Participants reported transitioning from cleaning practices to new formulas with reduced odors and shifting from spray cleansers to wipes. Personal protective equipment (PPE) used during cleaning tasks varied, with training differing among job categories. Aerosolized medication administration varied among facilities, with reported medication types and protocol changes over time. The results emphasized the significance of maintaining uniform protection, disseminating knowledge, and consistently adhering to PPE protocols in the healthcare environment. Addressing the identified gaps in comprehension and potential sources of exposure variability requires additional focus on occupational health and safety initiatives.

Communicable Illness Mitigation Strategies for Traveling Elite Sporting Organizations

CONTEXT

Transmission of communicable diseases observed in sporting organizations is often preventable. Early detection, isolation, and treatment can significantly diminish time lost. Until recently, there has been a paucity of standardized guidelines outlining feasible, preventable measures to protect both athletes and staff from contagious illnesses. Therefore, the purpose of this narrative was to highlight optimal prevention practices for transmission mitigation, with a particular focus on hygiene activity and travel considerations in professional sporting organizations.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Current recommendations from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and peer-reviewed journals.

STUDY DESIGN

Clinical review.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 5.

RESULTS

Communicable illness prevention strategies begin at the level of sufficient personal hygiene practices. Common area surface cleaning recommendations, including shared equipment sanitization between usage as well as designated equipment use to specific athletes, should be considered to minimize cross-contamination, in particular, for liked-position players. Intelligent design for shared areas can include redistributing the layout of communal spaces, most feasibly, spreading locker designation a minimum distance of 6 ft from one another. Travel considerations can include placing most susceptible passengers closest to window seating, boarding last and exiting first. Team physicians should have knowledge of essential personnel medical histories in an effort to risk stratify staff members and players in the setting of communicable disease.

CONCLUSION

Providing a framework for illness management and prevention is important when considering the effects on player health, missed time, performance, and overall cost. Containment of commonly observed communicable illnesses can be optimized with sufficient personal hygiene practices, common area surface cleaning recommendations, intelligent design for shared areas, travel and hotel considerations, as well as appropriate screening tools and isolation techniques.

STRENGTH OF RECOMMENDATION TAXONOMY (SORT)

B.

Mapping Chemical Respiratory Sensitization: How Useful Are Our Current Computational Tools?

Chemical respiratory sensitization is an immunological process that manifests clinically mostly as occupational asthma and is responsible for 1 in 6 cases of adult asthma, although this may be an underestimate of the prevalence, as it is under-diagnosed. Occupational asthma results in unemployment for roughly one-third of those affected due to severe health issues. Despite its high prevalence, chemical respiratory sensitization is difficult to predict, as there are currently no validated models and the mechanisms are not entirely understood, creating a significant challenge for regulatory bodies and industry alike. The Adverse Outcome Pathway (AOP) for respiratory sensitization is currently incomplete. However, some key events have been identified, and there is overlap with the comparatively well-characterized AOP for dermal sensitization. Because of this, and the fact that dermal sensitization is often assessed by in vivo, in chemico, or in silico methods, regulatory bodies are defaulting to the dermal sensitization status of chemicals as a proxy for respiratory sensitization status when evaluating chemical safety. We identified a data set of known human respiratory sensitizers, which we used to investigate the accuracy of a structural alert model, Toxtree, designed for skin sensitization and the Centre for Occupational and Environmental Health (COEH)'s model, a model developed specifically for occupational asthma. While both models had a reasonable level of accuracy, the COEH model achieved the highest balanced accuracy at 76%; when the models agreed, the overall accuracy was 87%. There were important differences between the models: Toxtree had superior performance for some structural alerts and some categories of well-characterized skin sensitizers, while the COEH model had high accuracy in identifying sensitizers that lacked identified skin sensitization reactivity domains. Overall, both models achieved respectable accuracy. However, neither model addresses potency, which, along with data quality, remains a hurdle, and the field must prioritize these issues to move forward.

Occupational lung diseases: from old and novel exposures to effective preventive strategies

Occupational exposure is an important, global cause of respiratory disease. Unlike many other non-communicable lung diseases, the proximal causes of many occupational lung diseases are well understood and they should be amenable to control with use of established and effective approaches. Therefore, the risks arising from exposure to silica and asbestos are well known, as are the means of their prevention. Although the incidence of occupational lung disease has decreased in many countries, in parts of the world undergoing rapid economic transition and population growth-often with large informal and unregulated workforces-occupational exposures continue to impose a heavy burden of disease. The incidence of interstitial and malignant lung diseases remains unacceptably high because control measures are not implemented or exposures arise in novel ways. With the advent of innovative technologies, new threats are continually introduced to the workplace (eg, indium compounds and vicinal diketones). In developed countries, work-related asthma is the commonest occupational lung disease of short latency. Although generic control measures to reduce the risk of developing or exacerbating asthma are well recognised, there is still uncertainty, for example, with regards to the management of workers who develop asthma but remain in the same job. In this Review, we provide recommendations for research, surveillance, and other action for reducing the burden of occupational lung diseases.

Chemical and biological work-related risks across occupations in Europe: a review

BACKGROUND

Work-related health inequalities are determined to some extent by an unequal exposure to chemical and biological risk factors of disease. Although their potential economic burden in the European Union (EU-25) might be substantial, comprehensive reviews focusing on the distribution of these risks across occupational groups are limited. Thus, the main objective of this review is to provide a synopsis of the exposure to chemical and biological hazards across occupational groups. In addition, main industrial applications of hazardous substances are identified and some epidemiological evidence is discussed regarding societal costs and incidence rates of work-related diseases.

METHODS

Available lists of carcinogens, sensitisers, mutagens, reprotoxic substances and biological hazards were consulted. For each work-related hazard the main industrial application was identified in order to assess which ISCO occupational groups may be associated with direct exposure. Where available, information on annual tonnage production, risk assessment of the substances and pathogens, and other relevant data were collected and reported.

RESULTS

Altogether 308 chemical and biological hazards were identified which may account to at least 693 direct exposures. These hazards concentrate on the following major occupational groups: technicians (ISCO 3), operators (ISCO 8), agricultural workers (ISCO 6) and workers in elementary occupations (ISCO 9). Common industrial applications associated with increased exposure rates relate among others to: (1) production or application of pigments, resins, cutting fluids, adhesives, pesticides and cleaning products, (2) production of rubber, plastics, textiles, pharmaceuticals and cosmetics, and (3) in agriculture, metallurgy and food processing industry, Societal costs of the unequal distribution of chemical and biological hazards across occupations depend on the corresponding work-related diseases and may range from 2900 EUR to 126000 EUR per case/year.

CONCLUSIONS

Risk of exposure to chemical and biological risks and work-related disease incidence are highly concentrated on four occupational groups. The unequal burden of exposure across occupations is an important contributing factor leading to health inequalities in society. The bulk of societal costs, however, are actually being borne by the workers themselves. There is an urgent need of taking into account the health impact of production processes and services on workers' health.