International archives of occupational and environmental health · 2008
Is there a need for special preventive medical check-ups in employees exposed to experimental animal dust?
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Schmid Klaus, Jüngert Barbara, Hager Meta, Drexler Hans
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: Due to new legal requirements in Germany, the employer must request preventive medical check-ups for activities involving exposure to dust from experimental animals in the rooms in which the animals are kept. The objective is to report our first experiences with these medical check-ups in the context of academic research.
METHODS: The check-ups were carried out since November 2005 and comprised a questionnaire and a medical examination, including a pulmonary function test with whole-body plethysmography. Respiratory, nasal and ocular symptoms related to occupational exposure to animals were documented. Participation in skin prick tests (ubiquitous inhalation allergens and laboratory animal allergens), a bronchial provocation test with methacholine, and serological examinations for total IgE and specific IgE antibodies was voluntary.
RESULTS: Data on 132 persons are presented. One hundred and six of these had already been exposed for at least 1 year. Main complaints at the workplace were sneezing and runny nose. Ocular symptoms and bronchial asthma were reported infrequently. The development of at least one of these symptoms occurred in 34% of employees with an exposure of at least 1 year. If the weekly exposure duration was at least 5 h, the proportion of employees with complaints rose to 44.9%. In employees occupationally exposed to mice and rats, work-related complaints occurred in 33.7 and 37.8%, respectively, and sensitisation rates were 12.7 and 16.3%, respectively. Employees with and without complaints differed in history of allergic symptoms, and workplace safety measures.
CONCLUSIONS: In employees with occupational contact with laboratory animal dust, the frequency of complaints was high. The results confirm the necessity of regular medical check-ups for employees with contact with laboratory animal dust. Nevertheless, the medical check-ups must be part of a prevention strategy including education, engineering controls, administrative controls, use of personal protective equipment and vocational integration.
METHODS: The check-ups were carried out since November 2005 and comprised a questionnaire and a medical examination, including a pulmonary function test with whole-body plethysmography. Respiratory, nasal and ocular symptoms related to occupational exposure to animals were documented. Participation in skin prick tests (ubiquitous inhalation allergens and laboratory animal allergens), a bronchial provocation test with methacholine, and serological examinations for total IgE and specific IgE antibodies was voluntary.
RESULTS: Data on 132 persons are presented. One hundred and six of these had already been exposed for at least 1 year. Main complaints at the workplace were sneezing and runny nose. Ocular symptoms and bronchial asthma were reported infrequently. The development of at least one of these symptoms occurred in 34% of employees with an exposure of at least 1 year. If the weekly exposure duration was at least 5 h, the proportion of employees with complaints rose to 44.9%. In employees occupationally exposed to mice and rats, work-related complaints occurred in 33.7 and 37.8%, respectively, and sensitisation rates were 12.7 and 16.3%, respectively. Employees with and without complaints differed in history of allergic symptoms, and workplace safety measures.
CONCLUSIONS: In employees with occupational contact with laboratory animal dust, the frequency of complaints was high. The results confirm the necessity of regular medical check-ups for employees with contact with laboratory animal dust. Nevertheless, the medical check-ups must be part of a prevention strategy including education, engineering controls, administrative controls, use of personal protective equipment and vocational integration.