-
International Journal of Molecular... Aug 2021Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths in North America and other developed countries. One of the reasons lung cancer is at the top of the list is... (Review)
Review
Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths in North America and other developed countries. One of the reasons lung cancer is at the top of the list is that it is often not diagnosed until the cancer is at an advanced stage. Thus, the earliest diagnosis of lung cancer is crucial, especially in screening high-risk populations, such as smokers, exposure to fumes, oil fields, toxic occupational places, etc. Based on the current knowledge, it looks that there is an urgent need to identify novel biomarkers. The current diagnosis of lung cancer includes different types of imaging complemented with pathological assessment of biopsies, but these techniques can still not detect early lung cancer developments. In this review, we described the advantages and disadvantages of current methods used in diagnosing lung cancer, and we provide an analysis of the potential use of body fluids as carriers of biomarkers as predictors of cancer development and progression.
Topics: Biomarkers, Tumor; Biopsy; Diagnostic Imaging; Disease Progression; Early Detection of Cancer; Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Occupational Diseases; Risk Factors; Smoking
PubMed: 34445366
DOI: 10.3390/ijms22168661 -
Respirology (Carlton, Vic.) Jun 2022Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is caused by exposure to noxious particles and gases. Smoking is the main risk factor, but other factors are also associated... (Review)
Review
Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is caused by exposure to noxious particles and gases. Smoking is the main risk factor, but other factors are also associated with COPD. Occupational exposure to vapours, gases, dusts and fumes contributes to the development and progression of COPD, accounting for a population attributable fraction of 14%. Workplace pollutants, in particular inorganic dust, can initiate airway damage and inflammation, which are the hallmarks of COPD pathogenesis. Occupational COPD is still underdiagnosed, mainly due to the challenges of assessing the occupational component of the disease in clinical settings, especially if other risk factors are present. There is a need for specific education and training for clinicians, and research with a focus on evaluating the role of occupational exposure in causing COPD. Early diagnosis and identification of occupational causes is very important to prevent further decline in lung function and to reduce the health and socio-economic burden of COPD. Establishing details of the occupational history by general practitioners or respiratory physicians could help to define the occupational burden of COPD for individual patients, providing the first useful interventions (smoking cessation, best therapeutic management, etc.). Once patients are diagnosed with occupational COPD, there is a wide international variation in access to specialist occupational medicine and public health services, along with limitations in workplace and income support. Therefore, a strong collaboration between primary care physicians, respiratory physicians and occupational medicine specialists is desirable to help manage COPD patients' health and social issues.
Topics: Dust; Gases; Humans; Occupational Diseases; Occupational Exposure; Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive; Risk Factors
PubMed: 35513770
DOI: 10.1111/resp.14272 -
European Respiratory Review : An... Sep 2022Workers in the mining and construction industries are at increased risk of respiratory and other diseases as a result of being exposed to harmful levels of airborne... (Review)
Review
Workers in the mining and construction industries are at increased risk of respiratory and other diseases as a result of being exposed to harmful levels of airborne particulate matter (PM) for extended periods of time. While clear links have been established between PM exposure and the development of occupational lung disease, the mechanisms are still poorly understood. A greater understanding of how exposures to different levels and types of PM encountered in mining and construction workplaces affect pathophysiological processes in the airways and lungs and result in different forms of occupational lung disease is urgently required. Such information is needed to inform safe exposure limits and monitoring guidelines for different types of PM and development of biomarkers for earlier disease diagnosis. Suspended particles with a 50% cut-off aerodynamic diameter of 10 µm and 2.5 µm are considered biologically active owing to their ability to bypass the upper respiratory tract's defences and penetrate deep into the lung parenchyma, where they induce potentially irreversible damage, impair lung function and reduce the quality of life. Here we review the current understanding of occupational respiratory diseases, including coal worker pneumoconiosis and silicosis, and how PM exposure may affect pathophysiological responses in the airways and lungs. We also highlight the use of experimental models for better understanding these mechanisms of pathogenesis. We outline the urgency for revised dust control strategies, and the need for evidence-based identification of safe level exposures using clinical and experimental studies to better protect workers' health.
Topics: Coal; Dust; Humans; Lung; Lung Diseases; Occupational Diseases; Occupational Exposure; Quality of Life; Silicon Dioxide
PubMed: 35831008
DOI: 10.1183/16000617.0250-2021 -
Respirology (Carlton, Vic.) Dec 2019Despite silica dust exposure being one of the earliest recognized causes of lung disease, Australia, USA, Israel, Turkey and other countries around the world have... (Review)
Review
Despite silica dust exposure being one of the earliest recognized causes of lung disease, Australia, USA, Israel, Turkey and other countries around the world have recently experienced significant outbreaks of silicosis. These outbreaks have occurred in modern industries such as denim jean production, domestic benchtop fabrication and jewellery polishing, where silica has been introduced without recognition and control of the hazard. Much of our understanding of silica-related lung disease is derived from traditional occupations such as mining, whereby workers may develop slowly progressive chronic silicosis. However, workers in modern industries are developing acute and accelerated silicosis over a short period of time, due to high-intensity silica concentrations, oxidative stress from freshly fractured silica and a rapid pro-inflammatory and pro-fibrotic response. Appropriate methods of screening and diagnosis remain unclear in these workers, and a significant proportion may go on to develop respiratory failure and death. There are no current effective treatments for silicosis. For those with near fatal respiratory failure, lung transplantation remains the only option. Strategies to reduce high-intensity silica dust exposure, enforced screening programmes and the identification of new treatments are urgently required.
Topics: Disease Management; Dust; Global Health; Humans; Occupational Exposure; Occupational Health; Silicon Dioxide; Silicosis
PubMed: 31517432
DOI: 10.1111/resp.13695 -
Environment International Jan 2021The World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Labour Organization (ILO) are developing joint estimates of the work-related burden of disease and injury... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The prevalence of occupational exposure to ergonomic risk factors: A systematic review and meta-analysis from the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates of the Work-related Burden of Disease and Injury.
BACKGROUND
The World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Labour Organization (ILO) are developing joint estimates of the work-related burden of disease and injury (WHO/ILO Joint Estimates), with contributions from a large network of experts. Evidence from mechanistic and human data suggests that occupational exposure to ergonomic (or physical) risk factors may cause osteoarthritis and other musculoskeletal diseases (excluding rheumatoid arthritis, gout, and back and neck pain). In this paper, we present a systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalence of occupational exposure to physical ergonomic risk factors for estimating the number of disability-adjusted life years from these diseases that are attributable to exposure to this risk factor, for the development of the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates.
OBJECTIVES
We aimed to systematically review and meta-analyse estimates of the prevalence of occupational exposure to ergonomic risk factors for osteoarthritis and other musculoskeletal diseases.
DATA SOURCES
We searched electronic bibliographic databases for potentially relevant records from published and unpublished studies, including Ovid Medline, EMBASE, and CISDOC. We also searched electronic grey literature databases, Internet search engines and organizational websites; hand-searched reference list of previous systematic reviews and included study records; and consulted additional experts.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY AND CRITERIA
We included working-age (≥15 years) workers in the formal and informal economy in any WHO and/or ILO Member State but excluded children (<15 years) and unpaid domestic workers. The exposure was defined as any occupational exposure to one or more of: force exertion, demanding posture, repetitive movement, hand-arm vibration, kneeling or squatting, lifting, and/or climbing. We included all study types with an estimate of the prevalence of occupational exposure to ergonomic risk factors.
STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS
At least two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts against the eligibility criteria at a first stage and full texts of potentially eligible records at a second stage, followed by extraction of data from qualifying studies. We combined prevalence estimates using random-effect meta-analysis. Two or more review authors assessed the risk of bias and the quality of evidence, using the ROB-SPEO tool and QoE-SPEO approach developed specifically for the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates.
RESULTS
Five studies (three cross-sectional studies and two cohort studies) met the inclusion criteria, comprising 150,895 participants (81,613 females) in 36 countries in two WHO regions (Africa, Europe). The exposure was generally assessed with questionnaire data about self-reported exposure. Estimates of the prevalence of occupational exposure to ergonomic risk factors are presented for all five included studies, disaggregated by country, sex, 5-year age group, industrial sector or occupational group where feasible. The pooled prevalence of any occupational exposure to ergonomic risk factors was 0.76 (95% confidence interval 0.69 to 0.84, 3 studies, 148,433 participants, 35 countries in the WHO Europe region, I 100%, low quality of evidence). Subgroup analyses found no statistically significant differences in exposure by sex but differences by age group, occupation and country. No evidence was found for publication bias. We assessed this body evidence to be of low quality, based on serious concerns for risk of bias due to exposure assessment only being based on self-report and for indirectness due to evidence from two WHO regions only.
CONCLUSIONS
Our systematic review and meta-analysis found that occupational exposure to ergonomic risk factors is highly prevalent. The current body of evidence is, however, limited, especially by risk of bias and indirectness. Producing estimates for the burden of disease attributable to occupational exposure to ergonomic risk factors appears evidence-based, and the pooled effect estimates presented in this systematic review may perhaps be used as input data for the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates. Protocol identifier:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2018.09.053. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018102631.
Topics: Adolescent; Cost of Illness; Cross-Sectional Studies; Ergonomics; Europe; Female; Humans; Occupational Diseases; Occupational Exposure; Prevalence; World Health Organization
PubMed: 33395953
DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2020.106157 -
Environmental Health and Preventive... Oct 2020Occupational noise-induced hearing loss (ONIHL) is the most prevalent occupational disease in the world. The goal of this study was to review the epidemiology,... (Review)
Review
Occupational noise-induced hearing loss (ONIHL) is the most prevalent occupational disease in the world. The goal of this study was to review the epidemiology, pathogenesis, and preventive measures of ONIHL among workers and provide evidence for the implementation of control measures. Literature studies were identified from the MEDLINE, PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Google Scholar using the search terms "noise-induced hearing loss" "prevalence", "pathogenesis", and "preventive measures". The articles reviewed in this report were limited from 2000 to 2020. Articles that were not published in the English language, manuscripts without an abstract, and opinion articles were excluded. After a preliminary screening, all of the articles were reviewed and synthesized to provide an overview of the current status of ONIHL among workers. The mechanism of ONIHL among workers is a complex interaction between environmental and host factors (both genetic and acquired factors). The outcomes of noise exposure are different among individual subjects. Clinical trials are currently underway to evaluate the treatment effect of antioxidants on ONIHL. Noise exposure may contribute to temporary or permanent threshold shifts; however, even temporary threshold shifts may predispose an individual to eventual permanent hearing loss. Noise prevention programs are an important preventive measure in reducing the morbidity of ONIHL among workers.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Female; Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Noise; Occupational Diseases; Prevalence; Young Adult
PubMed: 33129267
DOI: 10.1186/s12199-020-00906-0 -
Clinics in Chest Medicine Dec 2020Occupational respiratory infections can be caused by bacterial, viral, and fungal pathogens. Transmission in occupational settings can occur from other humans, animals,... (Review)
Review
Occupational respiratory infections can be caused by bacterial, viral, and fungal pathogens. Transmission in occupational settings can occur from other humans, animals, or the environment, and occur in various occupations and industries. In this article, we describe 4 occupationally acquired respiratory infections at the focus of NIOSH investigations over the last decade: tuberculosis (TB), influenza, psittacosis, and coccidioidomycosis. We highlight the epidemiology, clinical manifestations, occupational risk factors, and prevention measures.
Topics: Humans; Occupational Diseases; Occupational Exposure; Respiratory Tract Infections
PubMed: 33153691
DOI: 10.1016/j.ccm.2020.08.003 -
American Journal of Industrial Medicine Jan 2022Lateral epicondylitis (LE) is a highly prevalent musculoskeletal disorder in workers, often associated with physically demanding work. Knowledge of work-relatedness of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Lateral epicondylitis (LE) is a highly prevalent musculoskeletal disorder in workers, often associated with physically demanding work. Knowledge of work-relatedness of LE is crucial to develop appropriate preventive measures. This study investigates the prospective association between work-related physical risk factors and LE.
METHODS
A systematic literature review was conducted in MedLine using PubMed from January 1, 2010 until February 16, 2021. Published reports were included if: (1) LE was clinically assessed, (2) exposure to work-related physical risk factors was assessed, and (3) associations between LE and work-related physical risk factors were reported in prospective studies. Quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation.
RESULTS
In total, 318 workers with LE from a population of 5036 workers in five studies were included. Meta-analyses revealed high-quality evidence for associations between LE and a Strain Index (SI) score >5.1 (odds ratio [OR]: 1.75, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.11-2.78) and moderate-quality evidence for forearm rotation >4 h/day or forearm rotation ≥45° for ≥45% time (OR: 1.85, 95% CI: 1.10-3.10). Gripping, flexion and extension of the wrist, and repetitive movements showed no significant associations with LE.
CONCLUSION
High-quality evidence was found indicating that a higher SI increased the risk of LE. Moderate-quality evidence was found for an association between forearm rotation and LE. No associations were found between other physical risk factors and LE. Primary preventive interventions should focus on a reduction of the SI and of high forearm rotation in work.
Topics: Humans; Musculoskeletal Diseases; Occupational Diseases; Prospective Studies; Risk Factors; Tennis Elbow
PubMed: 34674287
DOI: 10.1002/ajim.23303 -
Radiologia Dec 2022The term inhalational lung disease comprises a group of entities that develop secondary to the active aspiration of particles. Most are occupational lung diseases....
The term inhalational lung disease comprises a group of entities that develop secondary to the active aspiration of particles. Most are occupational lung diseases. Inhalational lung diseases are classified as occupational diseases (pneumoconiosis, chemical pneumonitis), hypersensitivity pneumonitis, and electronic-cigarette-associated lung diseases. The radiologic findings often consist of nonspecific interstitial patterns that can be difficult to interpret. Therefore, radiologists' experience and multidisciplinary teamwork are key to ensure correct evaluation. The role of the radiologist is fundamental in preventive measures as well as in diagnosis and management, having an important impact on patients' overall health. It is crucial to take into account patients' possible exposure to particles both at work and at home.
Topics: Humans; Lung Diseases; Pneumoconiosis; Lung; Alveolitis, Extrinsic Allergic; Pneumonia
PubMed: 36737167
DOI: 10.1016/j.rxeng.2022.10.007 -
Jornal Brasileiro de Pneumologia :... 2021Work-related asthma (WRA) is highly prevalent in the adult population. WRA includes occupational asthma (OA), which is asthma caused by workplace exposures, and... (Review)
Review
Work-related asthma (WRA) is highly prevalent in the adult population. WRA includes occupational asthma (OA), which is asthma caused by workplace exposures, and work-exacerbated asthma (WEA), also known as work-aggravated asthma, which is preexisting or concurrent asthma worsened by workplace conditions. In adults, the estimated prevalence of OA is 16.0%, whereas that of WEA is 21.5%. An increasing number of chemicals used in industrial production, households, and services are associated with the incidence of adult-onset asthma attributable to exposure to chemicals. This review article summarizes the different types of WRA and describes diagnostic procedures, treatment, prevention, and approaches to patient management. It is not always easy to distinguish between OA and WEA. It is important to establish a diagnosis (of sensitizer-/irritant-induced OA or WEA) in order to prevent worsening of symptoms, as well as to prevent other workers from being exposed, by providing early treatment and counseling on social security and work-related issues.
Topics: Adult; Asthma, Occupational; Humans; Occupational Diseases; Prevalence
PubMed: 34406224
DOI: 10.36416/1806-3756/e20200577