-
Environment International Sep 2023
Meta-Analysis
Response to Letter to the Editor regarding "The prevalences and levels of occupational exposure to dusts and/or fibres (silica, asbestos and coal): A systematic review and meta-analysis from the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates of the Work-related Burden of Disease and Injury".
Topics: Humans; Coal; Dust; Prevalence; Silicon Dioxide; Asbestos; Occupational Exposure; Wounds and Injuries; Cost of Illness; World Health Organization
PubMed: 37669593
DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2023.108165 -
Microorganisms Aug 2023Salmonellosis is the second most commonly reported foodborne gastrointestinal infection in humans in the European Union (EU). Most outbreaks are caused by Enteritidis,... (Review)
Review
Salmonellosis is the second most commonly reported foodborne gastrointestinal infection in humans in the European Union (EU). Most outbreaks are caused by Enteritidis, present in contaminated food products, particularly in egg and egg products. In recent years, an increase in the prevalence of in laying hen flocks in the EU has been observed. For the effective control of infection, adequate detection is key. In laying hen flocks, the occurrence of in the EU is monitored by the culture of environmental samples (dust, faeces, and boot swabs). The performance of sampling procedures described in the literature for the detection of in laying hens was reviewed. In total, 924 abstracts were screened, resulting in the selection of 87 abstracts and 18 publications for qualitative and quantitative analyses, respectively. Sample sizes and sampling locations of faecal material and dust were variable and poorly described. Microbiological culture methods used to detect were variably described in the literature and were often incomplete. Overall, the available literature indicates higher sensitivity of environmental versus individual hen matrices and points to differences in sensitivity between environmental matrices. For non-cage housing systems, boot swabs are the preferred samples, while for cage housing systems dust might be a more reliable sample.
PubMed: 37630660
DOI: 10.3390/microorganisms11082100 -
International Journal of Environmental... Aug 2023Diet is the primary exposure pathway for phthalates, but relative contributions of other exposure sources are not well characterized. This study quantifies the relative... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Characterizing the Contribution of Indoor Residential Phthalate and Phthalate Alternative Dust Concentrations to Internal Dose in the US General Population: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Diet is the primary exposure pathway for phthalates, but relative contributions of other exposure sources are not well characterized. This study quantifies the relative contribution of indoor residential dust phthalate and phthalate alternative concentrations to total internal dose estimated from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) urinary metabolite concentrations. Specifically, median phthalate and phthalate alternative concentrations measured in residential dust were determined by updating a pre-existing systematic review and meta-analysis published in 2015 and the attributable internal dose was estimated using intake and reverse dosimetry models. Employing a predetermined search strategy, 12 studies published between January 2000 and April 2022 from Web of Science and PubMed measuring phthalates and phthalate alternatives in residential dust were identified. From the data extracted, it was estimated that dust contributed more significantly to the internal dose of low-molecular weight chemicals such as DEP and BBP when compared to high-molecular weight chemicals such as DEHTP. Additionally, findings showed that the chemical profile of residential dust is changing temporally with more phthalate alternatives being detected in the indoor environment. Future studies should seek to characterize the contribution of dust to an overall phthalate and phthalate alternative intake for individuals who have higher than normal exposures.
Topics: Humans; Nutrition Surveys; Phthalic Acids; Dust; Molecular Weight; Thinness
PubMed: 37623174
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph20166589 -
Environment International Aug 2023The 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
The prevalences and levels of occupational exposure to dusts and/or fibres (silica, asbestos and coal): 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 number of individual experts. Evidence from human, animal and mechanistic data suggests that occupational exposure to dusts and/or fibres (silica, asbestos and coal dust) causes pneumoconiosis. In this paper, we present a systematic review and meta-analysis of the prevalences and levels of occupational exposure to silica, asbestos and coal dust. These estimates of prevalences and levels will serve as input data for estimating (if feasible) the number of deaths and disability-adjusted life years that are attributable to occupational exposure to silica, asbestos and coal dust, for the development of the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates.
OBJECTIVES
We aimed to systematically review and meta-analyse estimates of the prevalences and levels of occupational exposure to silica, asbestos and coal dust among working-age (≥ 15 years) workers.
DATA SOURCES
We searched electronic academic databases for potentially relevant records from published and unpublished studies, including Ovid Medline, PubMed, EMBASE, and CISDOC. We also searched electronic grey literature databases, Internet search engines and organizational websites; hand-searched reference lists 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. We included all study types with objective dust or fibre measurements, published between 1960 and 2018, that directly or indirectly reported an estimate of the prevalence and/or level of occupational exposure to silica, asbestos and/or coal dust.
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, then data were extracted from qualifying studies. We combined prevalence estimates by industrial sector (ISIC-4 2-digit level with additional merging within Mining, Manufacturing and Construction) using random-effects meta-analysis. Two or more review authors assessed the risk of bias and all available authors assessed the quality of evidence, using the ROB-SPEO tool and QoE-SPEO approach developed specifically for the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates.
RESULTS
Eighty-eight studies (82 cross-sectional studies and 6 longitudinal studies) met the inclusion criteria, comprising > 2.4 million measurements covering 23 countries from all WHO regions (Africa, Americas, Eastern Mediterranean, South-East Asia, Europe, and Western Pacific). The target population in all 88 included studies was from major ISCO groups 3 (Technicians and Associate Professionals), 6 (Skilled Agricultural, Forestry and Fishery Workers), 7 (Craft and Related Trades Workers), 8 (Plant and Machine Operators and Assemblers), and 9 (Elementary Occupations), hereafter called manual workers. Most studies were performed in Construction, Manufacturing and Mining. For occupational exposure to silica, 65 studies (61 cross-sectional studies and 4 longitudinal studies) were included with > 2.3 million measurements collected in 22 countries in all six WHO regions. For occupational exposure to asbestos, 18 studies (17 cross-sectional studies and 1 longitudinal) were included with > 20,000 measurements collected in eight countries in five WHO regions (no data for Africa). For occupational exposure to coal dust, eight studies (all cross-sectional) were included comprising > 100,000 samples in six countries in five WHO regions (no data for Eastern Mediterranean). Occupational exposure to silica, asbestos and coal dust was assessed with personal or stationary active filter sampling; for silica and asbestos, gravimetric assessment was followed by technical analysis. Risk of bias profiles varied between the bodies of evidence looking at asbestos, silica and coal dust, as well as between industrial sectors. However, risk of bias was generally highest for the domain of selection of participants into the studies. The largest bodies of evidence for silica related to the industrial sectors of Construction (ISIC 41-43), Manufacturing (ISIC 20, 23-25, 27, 31-32) and Mining (ISIC 05, 07, 08). For Construction, the pooled prevalence estimate was 0.89 (95% CI 0.84 to 0.93, 17 studies, I 91%, moderate quality of evidence) and the level estimate was rated as of very low quality of evidence. For Manufacturing, the pooled prevalence estimate was 0.85 (95% CI 0.78 to 0.91, 24 studies, I 100%, moderate quality of evidence) and the pooled level estimate was rated as of very low quality of evidence. The pooled prevalence estimate for Mining was 0.75 (95% CI 0.68 to 0.82, 20 studies, I 100%, moderate quality of evidence) and the pooled level estimate was 0.04 mg/m (95% CI 0.03 to 0.05, 17 studies, I 100%, low quality of evidence). Smaller bodies of evidence were identified for Crop and animal production (ISIC 01; very low quality of evidence for both prevalence and level); Professional, scientific and technical activities (ISIC 71, 74; very low quality of evidence for both prevalence and level); and Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply (ISIC 35; very low quality of evidence for both prevalence and level). For asbestos, the pooled prevalence estimate for Construction (ISIC 41, 43, 45,) was 0.77 (95% CI 0.65 to 0.87, six studies, I 99%, low quality of evidence) and the level estimate was rated as of very low quality of evidence. For Manufacturing (ISIC 13, 23-24, 29-30), the pooled prevalence and level estimates were rated as being of very low quality of evidence. Smaller bodies of evidence were identified for Other mining and quarrying (ISIC 08; very low quality of evidence for both prevalence and level); Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply (ISIC 35; very low quality of evidence for both prevalence and level); and Water supply, sewerage, waste management and remediation (ISIC 37; very low quality of evidence for levels). For coal dust, the pooled prevalence estimate for Mining of coal and lignite (ISIC 05), was 1.00 (95% CI 1.00 to 1.00, six studies, I 16%, moderate quality of evidence) and the pooled level estimate was 0.77 mg/m (95% CI 0.68 to 0.86, three studies, I 100%, low quality of evidence). A small body of evidence was identified for Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply (ISIC 35); with very low quality of evidence for prevalence, and the pooled level estimate being 0.60 mg/m (95% CI -6.95 to 8.14, one study, low quality of evidence).
CONCLUSIONS
Overall, we judged the bodies of evidence for occupational exposure to silica to vary by industrial sector between very low and moderate quality of evidence for prevalence, and very low and low for level. For occupational exposure to asbestos, the bodies of evidence varied by industrial sector between very low and low quality of evidence for prevalence and were of very low quality of evidence for level. For occupational exposure to coal dust, the bodies of evidence were of very low or moderate quality of evidence for prevalence, and low for level. None of the included studies were population-based studies (i.e., covered the entire workers' population in the industrial sector), which we judged to present serious concern for indirectness, except for occupational exposure to coal dust within the industrial sector of mining of coal and lignite. Selected estimates of the prevalences and levels of occupational exposure to silica by industrial sector are considered suitable as input data for the WHO/ILO Joint Estimates, and selected estimates of the prevalences and levels of occupational exposure to asbestos and coal dust may perhaps also be suitable for estimation purposes. Protocol identifier: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2018.06.005. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42018084131.
Topics: Humans; Adolescent; Occupational Diseases; Dust; Prevalence; Silicon Dioxide; Cross-Sectional Studies; Coal; Steam; Asbestos; Occupational Exposure; World Health Organization; Cost of Illness
PubMed: 37487377
DOI: 10.1016/j.envint.2023.107980 -
PloS One 2023Occupational respiratory disorders are a major global public health concern among workers exposed to dust particles in dust-generating workplaces. Despite fragmented... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Occupational respiratory disorders are a major global public health concern among workers exposed to dust particles in dust-generating workplaces. Despite fragmented research findings on the magnitude of respiratory problems and the lack of a national occupational respiratory disease recording and reporting system at the Ethiopian factory, the prevalence of respiratory symptoms among factory workers were unknown. Therefore, the aim of this meta-analysis was to summarize and pool estimates from studies that reported the prevalence of respiratory symptoms and predictors among Ethiopian factory workers who worked in dusty environments.
METHODS
A systematic literature searches were conducted using electronic databases (PubMed, Science Direct, African Journals Online, and Web of Science). The primary and secondary outcomes were prevalence of respiratory symptoms and predictors, respectively. The STATA version 17 was used to analyze the data. A random effect meta-analysis model was used. Eggers test with p-value less than 5%, as well as the funnel plot, were used to assess publication bias.
RESULTS
The searches yielded 1596 articles, 15 of which were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. The pooled prevalence of respiratory symptoms among Ethiopian factory workers was 54.96% [95% confidence interval (CI):49.33-60.59%]. Lack of occupational health and safety (OSH) training [Odds Ratio (OR) = 2.34, 95%CI:1.56-3.52], work experience of over 5 years [OR = 3.19, 95%CI: 1.33-7.65], not using personal protective equipment (PPE) [OR = 1.76, 95%CI:1.30-2.39], and working more than eight hours per day [OR = 1.89, 95%CI:1.16-3.05] were all significant predictors of respiratory symptoms.
CONCLUSION
The prevalence of respiratory symptom was found to be high in Ethiopian factory workers. To prevent workers from being exposed to dust, regular provision and monitoring of PPE use, workers OSH training, and adequate ventilation in the workplace should be implemented.
Topics: Humans; Dust; Occupational Exposure; Lung Diseases; Lung; Personal Protective Equipment; Occupational Diseases
PubMed: 37478114
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0284551 -
PloS One 2023Occupational respiratory diseases are major global public health problems, particularly for industry workers. Several studies have investigated occupational respiratory... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Occupational respiratory diseases are major global public health problems, particularly for industry workers. Several studies have investigated occupational respiratory symptoms in various parts of Ethiopia. The findings have been inconsistent and inconclusive, and there is no nationally representative data on the subject. Therefore, this study aimed to estimate the pooled prevalence and factors associated with occupational respiratory symptoms among industry workers in Ethiopia (2010-2022).
METHODS
Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis framework Guidelines, search was conducted on several international databases including PubMed, CINAHL, African Journals Online, Hinari, Global Health, and Google scholar. The extracted data was analyzed using STATA 14. Random effect model was used to estimate the effect size. Egger regression test and I2 statistics were used to determine potential publication bias and heterogeneity, respectively among the reviewed articles.
RESULTS
The meta-analysis included a total of 15 studies with 5,135 participants, revealing a pooled prevalence of 51.6% (95% CI: 43.6-59.6) for occupational respiratory symptoms among industry workers in Ethiopia. The absence of personal protective equipment (OR = 1.97, 95% CI: [1.17-3.32]), lack of occupational health and safety training (OR = 3.04, 95% CI: [2.36-3.93]), previous dust exposure (OR = 3.17, 95% CI: [2.3-4.37]), poor working environment (OR = 2.4, 95% CI: [1.7-3.2]), work experience greater than five years (OR = 4.04, 95% CI: [1.61-10.16]), smoking (OR = 6.91, 95% CI: [2.94-16.2]), and previous respiratory illness (OR = 4.25, 95% CI: [2.44-7.42]) were found to associate with the symptoms.
CONCLUSIONS
The high prevalence of occupational respiratory symptoms among industry workers in Ethiopia underscores the urgent need for effective interventions. The provision of personal protective equipment and improvement of working environments by the government, industry owners, and other stakeholders are crucial in reducing occupational respiratory symptoms. Additionally, prioritizing occupational health and safety training for industry workers can help prevent and mitigate the impact of occupational respiratory diseases.
REGISTRATION
This systematic review has been registered in the International Prospective Registry of Systematic Review (PROSPERO) with a specific registration number CRD42022383745.
Topics: Humans; Ethiopia; Prevalence; Smoking; Tobacco Smoking; Lung Diseases; Occupational Diseases
PubMed: 37440513
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0288238 -
BMC Urology Jul 2023Comparing stone-free rates and associated outcome measures between two surgical modalities of lithotripsy fragmentation and removal or spontaneous passage of dust during... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
Comparing stone-free rates and associated outcome measures between two surgical modalities of lithotripsy fragmentation and removal or spontaneous passage of dust during retrograde intrarenal surgery (RIRS).
METHODS
In March 2023, we conducted a literature search in several widely used databases worldwide, including PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar. We only considered English articles and excluded pediatric patients. Reviews and protocols without any published data were excluded. We also excluded articles with conference abstracts and irrelevant content. We used the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel method and random-effects models to assess inverse variances and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for mean differences in categorical variables. The results were reported as odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.
RESULTS
Our final meta-analysis included nine articles, comprising two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and seven cohort studies. The total number of patients included in these studies was 1326, and all studies used holmium laser lithotripsy. The pooled analysis of the dust and fragmentation groups showed that the fragmentation group had a higher stone-free rate (OR 0.6; 95% CI 0.41 - 0.89; p = 0.01); the dust group had a shorter operative time (WMD - 11.6 min; 95% CI - 19.56 - -3.63; p = 0.004); and the dust group had a higher retreatment rate (OR 2.03; 95% CI 1.31 - 3.13; p = 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of length of hospital stay, overall complications, or postoperative fever.
CONCLUSIONS
Our results showed that both procedures could be safely and effectively used for upper ureteral and renal calculi lithotripsy, the dust group had potential advantages over the fragmentation group in terms of the operation time, and the fragmentation group had certain advantages in terms of stone-free rate and retreatment rate.
Topics: Humans; Kidney Calculi; Kidney; Lithotripsy; Lithotripsy, Laser; Nephrolithotomy, Percutaneous; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37420203
DOI: 10.1186/s12894-023-01283-w