Occupational use of high-level disinfectants and fecundity among nurses

Occupational exposure to high-level disinfectants and risk of miscarriage among nurses

OBJECTIVES

To examine the association of occupational exposure to high-level disinfectants (HLDs) with risk of miscarriage among nurses.

METHODS

Our study included women who enrolled in the Nurses' Health Study 3 (2010-2020) and had at least one pregnancy during follow-up. Occupational exposure to HLDs was self-reported at baseline. Every 6 months, a follow-up questionnaire was sent to participants asking for detailed information on pregnancies. We used a discrete-time Cox model to calculate the HRs and 95% CIs of miscarriage according to exposure to HLDs.

RESULTS

Our study included 2579 nurses with a median of 5.6 years of follow-up (range: 1-9 years), and we documented 768 (19%) cases of miscarriage among 3974 pregnancies. Compared with women with no HLD exposure, the HRs of miscarriage were 1.08 (95% CI: 0.87 to 1.34) for past users and 0.84 (95% CI: 0.68 to 1.04) for HLD users. Compared with women with no HLD exposure, duration, frequency, and type of HLD and use of exposure controls were not associated with risk of miscarriage. When restricting to pregnancies that occurred within 12 months of HLD use, occupational exposure to unspecified types of HLD was significantly associated with higher risk of miscarriage (HR=1.78; 95% CI: 1.08 to 2.93).

CONCLUSIONS

We observed no associations between occupational use of HLDs and miscarriage, except when we restricted to pregnancies occurring within 12 months of assessed baseline exposure. Given the observational design and limited sample size, results should be interpreted cautiously.

Occupational use of high-level disinfectants and asthma incidence in early- to mid-career female nurses: a prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

Occupational use of disinfectants among healthcare workers has been associated with asthma. However, most studies are cross-sectional, and longitudinal studies are not entirely consistent. To limit the healthy worker effect, it is important to conduct studies among early- to mid-career workers. We investigated the prospective association between use of disinfectants and asthma incidence in a large cohort of early- to mid-career female nurses.

METHODS

The Nurses' Health Study 3 is an ongoing, prospective, internet-based cohort of female nurses in the USA and Canada (2010-present). Analyses included 17 280 participants without a history of asthma at study entry (mean age: 34 years) and who had completed ≥1 follow-up questionnaire (sent every 6 months). Occupational use of high-level disinfectants (HLDs) was evaluated by questionnaire. We examined the association between HLD use and asthma development, adjusted for age, race, ethnicity, smoking status and body mass index.

RESULTS

During 67 392 person-years of follow-up, 391 nurses reported incident clinician-diagnosed asthma. Compared with nurses who reported ≤5 years of HLD use (89%), those with >5 years of HLD use (11%) had increased risk of incident asthma (adjusted HR (95% CI), 1.39 (1.04 to 1.86)). The risk of incident asthma was elevated but not statistically significant in those reporting >5 years of HLD use and current use of ≥2 products (1.72 (0.88 to 3.34)); asthma risk was significantly elevated in women with >5 years of HLD use but no current use (1.46 (1.00 to 2.12)).

CONCLUSIONS

Occupational use of HLDs was prospectively associated with increased asthma incidence in early- to mid-career nurses.

[Working at the hospital during pregnancy: A descriptive national cross-sectional study in France]

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the article is to describe the follow-up of pregnancies at work and occupational exposure to potential risks for pregnancy.

METHODS

A descriptive cross-sectional study was performed from April 1, 2017 to October 31, 2017 in the occupational health departments of French hospitals. After delivery and at the time of returning to work, 1,165 eligible workers were interviewed by occupational health physicians (OHPs). Socio-demographic information was self-reported. Occupational exposures were assessed by an OHP. Birth weight, gestational age, and sick leaves were also collected.

RESULTS

Among recruited workers, 51.8% were exposed to more than 5 occupational hazards. Biological and physical hazards were the most common hazards at the workplace. Note that heavy lifting ≥ 15 kg concerned 9.5% of workers. Only 20.1% of workers had a specific "pregnancy at work" medical visit with OHP during pregnancy; 26.8% benefited from workstation adjustments. In contrast, the level of sick leaves was high (86.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that pregnant workers in hospitals must be strictly supervised.

Administration of antineoplastic drugs and fecundity in female nurses

BACKGROUND

We examined the association between the administration of antineoplastic drugs (AD) and fecundity among female nurses.

METHODS

AD administration and use of exposure controls (EC) such as gloves, gowns, and needleless systems were self-reported at baseline among 2649 participants of the Nurses' Health Study 3, who were actively attempting pregnancy. Every 6 months thereafter, the nurses reported the current duration of their pregnancy attempt. Multivariable accelerated failure time models were used to estimate time ratios (TR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) adjusted for age, race, body mass index, smoking, marital status, hours of work, and other occupational risk factors.

RESULTS

Mean (standard deviation) age and BMI at baseline were 30.7 years (4.7) and 26.0 kg/m² (6.4). Forty-one percent of nurses reported ever administering AD; 30% only in the past and 11% currently. The former administration of AD (TR = 1.02, 95% CI, 0.93-1.12) was unrelated to the ongoing duration of pregnancy attempt. Among nurses currently administering AD, those who had administered AD for 6 years and above had a 27% (95% CI, 6%-53%) longer duration of pregnancy attempt than nurses who never handled ADs in unadjusted analyses. This difference disappeared in multivariable analyses (TR = 1.01, 95% CI, 0.85-1.21). 93% (n = 270) of the nurses currently administering ADs reported consistent use of EC. These nurses had a similar median duration of pregnancy attempt to those who never handled AD (TR = 1.00, 95% CI, 0.87-1.15).

CONCLUSIONS

Administration of ADs did not appear to have an impact on fecundity in a cohort of nurses planning for pregnancy with a high prevalence of consistent ECs. Our results may not be generalizable to women who are less compliant with PPE use or with less availability to ECs. Therefore, it is possible that we did not observe an association between occupational exposure to AD and reduced fecundity because of lower exposure due to the more prevalent use of effective ECs.

Development of a bar code-based exposure assessment method to evaluate occupational exposure to disinfectants and cleaning products: a pilot study

OBJECTIVE

Healthcare workers are highly exposed to various types of disinfectants and cleaning products. Assessment of exposure to these products remains a challenge. We aimed to investigate the feasibility of a method, based on a smartphone application and bar codes, to improve occupational exposure assessment among hospital/cleaning workers in epidemiological studies.

METHODS

A database of disinfectants and cleaning products used in French hospitals, including their names, bar codes and composition, was developed using several sources: ProdHyBase (a database of disinfectants managed by hospital hygiene experts), and specific regulatory agencies and industrial websites. A smartphone application has been created to scan bar codes of products and fill a short questionnaire. The application was tested in a French hospital. The ease of use and the ability to record information through this new approach were estimated.

RESULTS

The method was tested in a French hospital (7 units, 14 participants). Through the application, 126 records (one record referred to one product entered by one participant/unit) were registered, majority of which were liquids (55.5%) or sprays (23.8%); 20.6% were used to clean surfaces and 15.9% to clean toilets. Workers used mostly products with alcohol and quaternary ammonium compounds (>90% with weekly use), followed by hypochlorite bleach and hydrogen peroxide (28.6%). For most records, information was available on the name (93.7%) and bar code (77.0%). Information on product compounds was available for all products and recorded in the database.

CONCLUSION

This innovative and easy-to-use method could help to improve the assessment of occupational exposure to disinfectants/cleaning products in epidemiological studies.