-
International Archives of Occupational... Apr 2016To give a systematic review of the development of noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) in working life. (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
To give a systematic review of the development of noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) in working life.
METHODS
A literature search in MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and Health and Safety Abstracts, with appropriate keywords on noise in the workplace and health, revealed 22,413 articles which were screened by six researchers. A total of 698 articles were reviewed in full text and scored with a checklist, and 187 articles were found to be relevant and of sufficient quality for further analysis.
RESULTS
Occupational noise exposure causes between 7 and 21 % of the hearing loss among workers, lowest in the industrialized countries, where the incidence is going down, and highest in the developing countries. It is difficult to distinguish between NIHL and age-related hearing loss at an individual level. Most of the hearing loss is age related. Men lose hearing more than women do. Heredity also plays a part. Socioeconomic position, ethnicity and other factors, such as smoking, high blood pressure, diabetes, vibration and chemical substances, may also affect hearing. The use of firearms may be harmful to hearing, whereas most other sources of leisure-time noise seem to be less important. Impulse noise seems to be more deleterious to hearing than continuous noise. Occupational groups at high risk of NIHL are the military, construction workers, agriculture and others with high noise exposure.
CONCLUSION
The prevalence of NIHL is declining in most industrialized countries, probably due to preventive measures. Hearing loss is mainly related to increasing age.
Topics: Adult; Female; Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced; Humans; Male; Noise, Occupational; Occupational Diseases; Occupational Exposure; Risk Factors
PubMed: 26249711
DOI: 10.1007/s00420-015-1083-5 -
Indoor Air Jan 2022The objectives of the systematic review were to: identify the work sectors at risk for exposure to formaldehyde; investigate the procedures applied to assess... (Review)
Review
The objectives of the systematic review were to: identify the work sectors at risk for exposure to formaldehyde; investigate the procedures applied to assess occupational exposure; evaluate the reported exposure levels among the different settings. An electronic search of Pubmed, Scopus, Web of Science and ToxNet was carried out for collecting all the articles on the investigated issue published from January 1, 2004 to September 30, 2019. Forty-three papers were included in the review, and evidenced a great number of occupational scenarios at risk for formaldehyde exposure. All the included studies collected data on formaldehyde exposure levels by a similar approach: environmental and personal sampling followed by chromatographic analyses. Results ranged from not detectable values until to some mg m of airborne formaldehyde. The riskiest occupational settings for formaldehyde exposure were the gross anatomy and pathology laboratories, the hairdressing salons and some specific productive settings, such as wooden furniture factories, dairy facilities and fish hatcheries. Notice that formaldehyde, a well-known carcinogen, was recovered in air at levels higher than outdoor in almost all the studied scenarios/activities; thus, when formaldehyde cannot be removed or substituted, targeted strategies for exposure elimination or mitigation must be adopted.
Topics: Air Pollution, Indoor; Formaldehyde; Humans; Laboratories; Occupational Exposure; Respiratory Hypersensitivity
PubMed: 34708443
DOI: 10.1111/ina.12949 -
Occupational Medicine (Oxford, England) Dec 2023The association between asbestos exposure and ovarian cancer has been questioned given the possible misdiagnosis of peritoneal mesothelioma as ovarian cancer.
BACKGROUND
The association between asbestos exposure and ovarian cancer has been questioned given the possible misdiagnosis of peritoneal mesothelioma as ovarian cancer.
AIMS
To update a systematic review on ovarian cancer risk in women occupationally exposed to asbestos, exploring the association with the time since first exposure and the duration of exposure.
METHODS
We searched PubMed from 2008 onwards, screened previous systematic reviews, combined standardized mortality ratios (SMR) using random effect models and quantified heterogeneity using the I2 statistic. To assess tumour misclassification, we compared the distribution of observed excess ovarian cancers (OEOC) to that expected (EEOC) from the distribution of peritoneal cancers in strata of latency and exposure duration.
RESULTS
Eighteen publications (20 populations), including a pooled analysis of 21 cohorts, were included. The pooled SMR was 1.79 (95% confidence interval 1.38-2.31), with moderate heterogeneity between studies (I2 = 42%), based on 144 ovarian cancer deaths/cases. The risk was increased for women with indirect indicators of higher exposure, longer duration and latency, and lower for chrysotile than for crocidolite exposure. The effect of duration and latency could not be completely disentangled, since no multivariate analysis was available for time-related variables. The dissimilarity index between OEOC and EEOC for the time since first exposure was small suggesting a similar pattern of risk.
CONCLUSIONS
While some misclassification between ovarian and peritoneal cancers cannot be excluded, the observed excess risk of ovarian cancer should be added to the overall disease burden of asbestos.
Topics: Humans; Female; Asbestos; Ovarian Neoplasms; Risk; Occupational Exposure; Time Factors; Mesothelioma; Occupational Diseases; Lung Neoplasms
PubMed: 38072464
DOI: 10.1093/occmed/kqad122 -
Occupational Medicine (Oxford, England) Jun 2023Existing evidence suggests that ingestion of high doses of arsenic through drinking water is associated with an increased risk of genitourinary cancers, while systematic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Existing evidence suggests that ingestion of high doses of arsenic through drinking water is associated with an increased risk of genitourinary cancers, while systematic evidence on workers exposed to arsenic is lacking.
AIMS
The aim of this study is to systematically review the evidence on the association between occupational exposure to arsenic and genitourinary cancer risk and mortality.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was carried out on Pubmed, Web of Science and Embase by including cohort and case-control studies. Study-specific relative risks (RRs) and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled using Mandel-Paule random-effects model. Contour-enhanced funnel plot and Egger's test were used to assess the occurrence of publication bias.
RESULTS
A total of 17 studies were included in the meta-analysis, 7 on cancer incidence (n = 161,244 individuals) and 10 on cancer mortality (n = 91,868). Most of them were cohort (71%) and industry-based studies (59%). The meta-analysis failed to detect an increased risk of genitourinary cancers among workers exposed to arsenic, except for a suggestive but not significant positive association for bladder cancer incidence (RR: 1.26, 95% CI: 0.89, 1.80), although this estimate was based on only three studies. No compelling evidence of publication bias was found (P = 0.885).
CONCLUSIONS
Our findings did not show an association between occupational exposure to arsenic and genitourinary cancers, although further high-quality studies with detailed exposure assessment at the individual level are needed to clarify this relationship.
Topics: Humans; Arsenic; Occupational Exposure; Neoplasms; Risk; Urogenital Neoplasms
PubMed: 37262320
DOI: 10.1093/occmed/kqad066 -
Environmental Research Aug 2023The use of pesticides can result in harm to both the environment and human health. There is a growing concern in the field of occupational health about the impact on the... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The use of pesticides can result in harm to both the environment and human health. There is a growing concern in the field of occupational health about the impact on the mental health of agricultural workers.
OBJECTIVES
The objective of this review was to systematize scientific evidence from the last ten years on the impact of occupational exposure to pesticides on the development of depression symptoms in agricultural workers.
METHODS
We conducted a comprehensive search in the PubMed and Scopus databases from 2011 to September 2022. Our search included studies in English, Spanish, and Portuguese that examined the association between occupational exposure to pesticides and symptoms of depression in agricultural workers, following the guidelines recommended by the PRISMA statement and the PECO strategy (Population, Exposure, Comparison, and Outcomes).
RESULTS
Among the 27 articles reviewed, 78% of them indicated a link between exposure to pesticides and the incidence of depression symptoms. The pesticides most frequently reported in the studies were organophosphates (17 studies), herbicides (12 studies), and pyrethroids (11 studies). The majority of the studies were rated as having intermediate to intermediate-high quality, with the use of standardized measures to assess both exposure and effect.
CONCLUSION
The updated evidence presented in our review indicates a clear association between pesticide exposure and the development of depressive symptoms. However, more high-quality longitudinal studies are necessary to control for sociocultural variables and utilize pesticide-specific biomarkers and biomarkers of depression. Given the increased use of these chemicals and the health risks associated with depression, it is crucial to implement more stringent measures to monitor the mental health of agricultural workers regularly exposed to pesticides and to enhance surveillance of companies that apply these chemicals.
Topics: Humans; Pesticides; Farmers; Depression; Occupational Exposure; Biomarkers; Agricultural Workers' Diseases
PubMed: 37217130
DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2023.116190 -
Expert Review of Respiratory Medicine Jul 2022The risk of lung cancer from radon exposure was small compared to tobacco smoking (BEIR VI), but the relationship between these two carcinogenic agents has yet to be...
INTRODUCTION
The risk of lung cancer from radon exposure was small compared to tobacco smoking (BEIR VI), but the relationship between these two carcinogenic agents has yet to be quantitatively estimated. The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate the last evidences on the role of radon occupational exposures and tobacco smoke on lung cancer risk.
AREAS COVERED
Thirteen articles were selected using two different databases, PubMed and Scifinder, and were limited to those published from 2010 to 2021. The reference list of selected studies was reviewed to identify other relevant papers.
EXPERT OPINION
Seven papers included in this systematic review did not deal with the multiplicative or the additive type of interaction between radon exposure and smoking habit. Six papers discussed the nature of this interaction with a prevalence of the sub-multiplicative model compared to the additive one. Altogether, smoking adjustment did not significantly change lung cancer risk. The included studies might constitute a starting point for updating the models for risk assessment in occupational and residential scenarios, promoting concomitantly the exposure reduction to radon and other cofactors, as recently introduced by Italian Legislative Decree number 101 of 31 July 2020, an application of Euratom Directive 59/2013.
Topics: Humans; Lung Neoplasms; Occupational Exposure; Radon; Risk Assessment; Nicotiana; Tobacco Smoke Pollution
PubMed: 35912519
DOI: 10.1080/17476348.2022.2108795 -
International Maritime Health 2021Occupational noise exposure has been identified as a significant risk factor for fish harvesters. Chronic noise exposure causes hearing and other health problems and...
BACKGROUND
Occupational noise exposure has been identified as a significant risk factor for fish harvesters. Chronic noise exposure causes hearing and other health problems and undermines the quality of life and well-being. This review paper aims to highlight noise-related auditory and non-auditory health effects among fish harvesters.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A systematic literature search approach was adopted using the following databases: PubMed, Embase, SCOPUS, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and by exploring grey literature. The literature search was conducted in 2020 (between October 15 and November 30). Relevant articles were explored by reviewing title, keywords, and abstract based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The full-text critical review of selected papers was made and finalized the most relevant studies.
RESULTS
Initial 1,281 records were identified, exploring various databases and additional sources using relevant keywords. Duplicate articles were removed and retrieved 746 articles. After that, a screening of 746 research papers was done based on the selection criteria and finalised 28 articles for full-text review. Finally, articles were filtered based on the study's aim and extracted 17 papers for the final review.
CONCLUSIONS
Noise-induced hearing loss was considered a significant health risk to fish harvesters across the studies, affecting physical and emotional well-being. The prevalence of hearing loss was observed from 6% to 80%. Other health problems, such as headache, dizziness, annoyance, stress, fatigue, elevated blood pressure, sleep disturbances, and impaired cognitive performance, were also reported. Further research is needed to validate the non-auditory health effects among fish harvesters.
Topics: Animals; Fisheries; Hearing Loss, Noise-Induced; Humans; Noise, Occupational; Occupational Diseases; Occupational Exposure; Occupations; Quality of Life
PubMed: 34604990
DOI: 10.5603/IMH.2021.0038 -
World Journal of Urology Apr 2023There is conflicting evidence on the association between asbestos exposure and bladder cancer. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to provide evidence on... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
There is conflicting evidence on the association between asbestos exposure and bladder cancer. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to provide evidence on occupational asbestos exposure and the risk of mortality and incidence of bladder cancer.
METHODS
We searched three relevant electronic databases (Pubmed, Scopus, and Embase) from inception to October 2021. The methodological quality of included articles was evaluated using the US National Institutes of Health tool. Standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) and standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) for bladder cancer, as well as respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs), were extracted or calculated for each included cohort. Main and subgroup meta-analyses according to first year of employment, industry, sex, asbestos type, and geographic region were performed.
RESULTS
Fifty-nine publications comprising 60 cohorts were included. Bladder cancer incidence and mortality were not significantly associated with occupational asbestos exposure (pooled SIR: 1.04, 95% CI: 0.95-1.13, P = 0.000; pooled SMR: 1.06, 95% CI: 0.96-1.17, P = 0.031). Bladder cancer incidence was higher among workers employed between 1908 and 1940 (SIR: 1.15, 95% CI: 1.01-1.31). Mortality was elevated in asbestos workers cohorts (SMR: 1.12, 95% CI: 1.06-1.30) and in the subgroup analysis for women (SMR: 1.83, 95% CI: 1.22-2.75). No association was found between asbestos types and bladder cancer incidence or mortality. We observed no difference in the subgroup analysis for countries and no direct publication bias evidence.
CONCLUSION
There is evidence that workers with occupational asbestos exposure have a bladder cancer incidence and mortality similar to the general population.
Topics: Humans; Female; Occupational Diseases; Asbestos; Occupational Exposure; Urinary Bladder Neoplasms; Incidence; Lung Neoplasms
PubMed: 36847813
DOI: 10.1007/s00345-023-04327-w -
BMC Cancer Feb 2015Sinonasal cancer (SNC) has been related to occupational exposures, but the relative risk associated to specific jobs and/or carcinogen exposures other than wood and... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Sinonasal cancer (SNC) has been related to occupational exposures, but the relative risk associated to specific jobs and/or carcinogen exposures other than wood and leather dust is generally based on small or inadequate sample sizes and the range of observed estimates is large. This paper is aimed at investigating such relationship through a systematic review of the literature followed by a meta-analysis of studies meeting specific inclusion criteria.
METHODS
Systematic search was made with PubMed, Google Scholar and Scopus engines using related keywords. Occupational exposures include wood and leather dust, formaldehyde, nickel and chromium compounds, textile industry, farming and construction. Meta-analysis of published studies after 1985 with a case-control or cohort design was performed, firstly using the fixed-effect model. Heterogeneity was assessed with the Q statistical test and quantified by the I(2) index. When the heterogeneity hypothesis appeared relevant, the random-effect model was chosen. Sources of heterogeneity were explored using subgroup analyses.
RESULTS
Out of 63 reviewed articles, 28 (11 cohort, 17 case-control) were used in the meta-analysis. Heterogeneity among studies was observed and random-effects models were used. Exposure to wood dust results associated with SNC (RRpooled = 5.91, 95% CI: 4.31-8.11 for the case-control studies and 1.61, 95% CI: 1.10-2.37 for the cohort studies), as well as to leather dust (11.89, 95% CI: 7.69-18.36). The strongest associations are with adenocarcinomas (29.43, 95% CI: 16.46-52.61 and 35.26, 95% CI: 20.62-60.28 respectively). An increased risk of SNC for exposures to formaldehyde (1.68, 95% CI: 1.37-2.06 for the case control and 1.09, 95% CI: 0.66-1.79 for the cohort studies), textile industry (2.03, 95% CI: 1.47-2.8), construction (1.62, 95% CI: 1.11-2.36) and nickel and chromium compounds (18.0, 95% CI: 14.55-22.27) was found. Subset analyses identified several sources of heterogeneity and an exposure-response relationship was suggested for wood dust (p = 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS
By confirming the strength of association between occupational exposure to causal carcinogens and SNC risk, our results may provide indications to the occupational etiology of SNC (not only wood and leather dusts). Future studies could be focused on specific occupational groups to confirm causative agents and to define appropriate preventive measures.
Topics: Agriculture; Dust; Formaldehyde; Humans; Metals, Heavy; Occupational Exposure; Odds Ratio; Paranasal Sinus Neoplasms; Publication Bias; Risk; Textile Industry
PubMed: 25885319
DOI: 10.1186/s12885-015-1042-2 -
International Journal of Environmental... Jun 2020(1) : Due to inconsistencies in epidemiological findings, there has been uncertainty regarding the association of lead compounds with brain tumors. We performed a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
(1) : Due to inconsistencies in epidemiological findings, there has been uncertainty regarding the association of lead compounds with brain tumors. We performed a meta-analysis of published case-control and cohort studies exploring lead compound exposure and brain tumor risk. (2) : We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane to find eligible studies. Eighteen studies were selected for assessment of occupational exposure to lead compound and brain tumor. Pooled estimates of odds ratios (ORs) were obtained using random effects models. We assessed the differences through subgroup analysis according to tumor type, study design, measurements of exposure, and tumor outcome. Statistical tests for publication bias, heterogeneity, and sensitivity analysis were applied. (3) : Our systematic review and meta-analysis showed a not significant association with lead exposure and risk of benign and malignant brain tumors (pooled OR = 1.11, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 0.95-1.29). Including only malignant brain tumors, the risk of brain tumor was significantly increased (pooled OR = 1.13, 95% CI: 1.04-1.24). (4) : This meta-analysis provides suggestive evidence for an association between lead compound exposure and brain tumor. In future studies, it will be necessary to identify the effect of lead compounds according to the types of brain tumor.
Topics: Australia; Brain Neoplasms; Humans; Lead; Occupational Exposure; Odds Ratio
PubMed: 32503353
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17113975