Seroprevalence of Bartonella species, Coxiella burnetii and Toxoplasma gondii among patients with hematological malignancies: A pilot study in Romania.

Patients receiving immunosuppressive cancer treatments in settings where there is a high degree of human-animal interaction may be at increased risk for opportunistic zoonotic infections or reactivation of latent infections. We sought to determine the seroprevalence of selected zoonotic pathogens among patients diagnosed with haematologic malignancies and undergoing chemotherapeutic treatments in Romania, where much of the general population lives and/or works in contact with livestock. A convenience sample of 51 patients with haematologic cancer undergoing chemotherapy at a referral clinic in Cluj-Napoca, Romania, was surveyed regarding animal exposures. Blood samples were obtained and tested for evidence of infection with Bartonella species, Coxiella burnetii and Toxoplasma gondii, which are important opportunistic zoonotic agents in immunocompromised individuals. 58.8% of participants reported living or working on a farm, and living or working on a farm was associated with contact with livestock and other animals. 37.5% of participants were IgG seroreactive against one or more of five Bartonella antigens, and seroreactivity was statistically associated with living on farms. Farm dwellers were 3.6 times more likely to test IgG seroreactive to Bartonella antibodies than non-farm dwellers. 47.1% of the participants tested T. gondii IgG positive and 13.7% tested C. burnetii IgG positive, indicating past or latent infection. C. burnetii IgM antibodies were detected in four participants (7.8%), indicating possible recent infection. These results indicate that a large proportion of patients with haematologic cancer in Romania may be at risk for zoonotic infections or for reactivation of latent zoonotic infections, particularly with respect to Bartonella species. Special attention should be paid to cancer patients' exposure to livestock and companion animals in areas where much of the population lives in rural settings.

A survey of veterinary antimicrobial prescribing practices, Washington State 2015.

Antimicrobial resistance is a growing global health issue. It is also a recognised problem in veterinary medicine. Between September and December 2015 the authors administered a cross-sectional survey to licensed veterinarians in Washington State to assess factors affecting antimicrobial prescribing practices among veterinarians in Washington State. Two hundred and three veterinarians completed the survey. The majority of respondents (166, 82 per cent) were engaged in small animal or exotic animal practice. 24 per cent of respondents reported not ordering culture and sensitivity (C/S) testing in practice. Of the 76 per cent of veterinarians who reported ordering C/S tests, 36 per cent reported ordering such testing 'often' or 'always' when treating presumptive bacterial infections. Most respondents (65 per cent) mentioned cost as the most common barrier to ordering a C/S test. Only 16 (10 per cent) respondents reported having access to or utilising a clinic-specific antibiogram. This survey demonstrated that while antimicrobials are commonly used in veterinary practice, and veterinarians are concerned about antimicrobial resistance, cost is a barrier to obtaining C/S tests to guide antimicrobial therapy. Summaries of antimicrobial resistance patterns are rarely available to the practising veterinarian. Efforts to promote antimicrobial stewardship in a 'One Health' manner should address barriers to the judicious use of antimicrobials in the veterinary practice setting.

Reported health conditions in animals residing near natural gas wells in southwestern Pennsylvania.

Natural gas extraction activities, including the use of horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing, may pose potential health risks to both human and animal populations in close proximity to sites of extraction activity. Because animals may have increased exposure to contaminated water and air as well as increased susceptibility to contaminant exposures compared to nearby humans, animal disease events in communities living near natural gas extraction may provide "sentinel" information useful for human health risk assessment. Community health evaluations as well as health impact assessments (HIAs) of natural gas exploration should therefore consider the inclusion of animal health metrics in their assessment process. We report on a community environmental health survey conducted in an area of active natural gas drilling, which included the collection of health data on 2452 companion and backyard animals residing in 157 randomly-selected households of Washington County, Pennsylvania (USA). There were a total of 127 reported health conditions, most commonly among dogs. When reports from all animals were considered, there were no significant associations between reported health condition and household proximity to natural gas wells. When dogs were analyzed separately, we found an elevated risk of 'any' reported health condition in households less than 1km from the nearest gas well (OR = 3.2, 95% CI 1.07-9.7), with dermal conditions being the most common of canine disorders. While these results should be considered hypothesis generating and preliminary, they suggest value in ongoing assessments of pet dogs as well as other animals to better elucidate the health impacts of natural gas extraction on nearby communities.

Methods for evaluating temporal trends in noise exposure.

OBJECTIVE: Hearing conservation programs have been mandatory in many US industries since 1983. Since then, three program elements (audiometric testing, hearing protection, and training) have been the focus of much research. By comparison, little has been done on noise exposure evaluation. DESIGN: Temporal trends in time weighted average (TWA) exposures and the fraction of measurements exceeding 85 dBA were evaluated by facility, by exposure group within facility, and by individual worker within facility. STUDY SAMPLE: A large dataset (> 10 000 measurements over 20 years) from eight facilities operated by a multinational aluminum manufacturing company was studied. RESULTS: Overall, exposures declined across locations over the study period. Several facilities demonstrated substantial reductions in exposure, and the results of mean noise levels and exceedance fractions generally showed good agreement. The results of analyses at the individual level diverged with analyses by facility and exposure group within facility, suggesting that individual-level analyses, while challenging, may provide important information not available from coarser levels of analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Validated metrics are needed to allow for assessment of temporal trends in noise exposure. Such metrics will improve our ability to characterize, in a standardized manner, efforts to reduce noise-induced hearing loss.

Organic solvent exposure and hearing loss in a cohort of aluminium workers.

OBJECTIVES: Organic solvent exposure has been shown to cause hearing loss in animals and humans. Less is known about the risk of hearing loss due to solvent exposures typically found in US industry. The authors performed a retrospective cohort study to examine the relationship between solvent exposure and hearing loss in US aluminium industry workers. METHODS: A cohort of 1319 workers aged 35 years or less at inception was followed for 5 years. Linkage of employment, industrial hygiene and audiometric surveillance records allowed for estimation of noise and solvent exposures and hearing loss rates over the study period. Study subjects were classified as "solvent exposed" or not, on the basis of industrial hygiene records linked with individual job histories. High frequency hearing loss was modelled as both a continuous and a dichotomous outcome. RESULTS: Typical solvent exposures involved mixtures of xylene, toluene and/or methyl ethyl ketone (MEK). Recorded solvent exposure levels varied widely both within and between jobs. In a multivariate logistic model, risk factors for high frequency hearing loss included age (OR = 1.06, p = 0.004), hunting or shooting (OR = 1.35, p = 0.049), noisy hobbies (OR = 1.74, p = 0.01), baseline hearing level (OR = 1.04, p<0.001) and solvent exposure (OR = 1.87, p = 0.004). A multivariate linear regression analysis similarly found significant associations between high frequency hearing loss and age (p<0.001), hunting or shooting (p<0.001), noisy hobbies (p = 0.03), solvent exposure (p<0.001) and baseline hearing (p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: These results suggest that occupational exposure to organic solvent mixtures is a risk factor for high frequency hearing loss, although the data do not allow conclusions about dose-response relationships. Industries with solvent-exposed workers should include such workers in hearing conservation programs.

Do ambient noise exposure levels predict hearing loss in a modern industrial cohort?

BACKGROUND: Much of what is known about the exposure-response relationship between occupational noise exposures and hearing loss comes from cross-sectional studies conducted before the widespread implementation of workplace hearing conservation programmes. Little is known about the current relationship of ambient noise exposure measurements to hearing loss risk. AIM: To examine the relationship between rates of high frequency hearing loss and measured levels of noise exposure in a modern industrial workforce. METHODS: Ten-year hearing loss rates were determined for 6217 employees of an aluminium manufacturing company. Industrial hygiene and human resources records allowed for reconstruction of individual noise exposures. Hearing loss rates were compared to ANSI 3.44 predictions based on age and noise exposure. Associations between hearing loss, noise exposure, and covariate risk factors were assessed using multivariate regression. RESULTS: Workers in higher ambient noise jobs tended to experience less high frequency hearing loss than co-workers exposed at lower noise levels. This trend was also seen in stratified analyses of white males and non-hunters. At higher noise exposure levels, the magnitude of hearing loss was less than predicted by ANSI 3.44 formulae. There was no indication that a healthy worker effect could explain these findings. The majority of 10 dB standard threshold shifts (STS) occurred in workers whose calculated ambient noise exposures were less than or equal to 85 dBA. CONCLUSIONS: In this modern industrial cohort, hearing conservation efforts appear to be reducing hearing loss rates, especially at higher ambient noise levels. This could be related to differential use of hearing protection. The greatest burden of preventable occupational hearing loss was found in workers whose noise exposure averaged 85 dBA or less. To further reduce rates of occupational hearing loss, hearing conservation programmes may require innovative approaches targeting workers with noise exposures close to 85 dBA.

Is acculturation related to use of hearing protection?

Noise-exposed employees with limited English skills may pose a special challenge for hearing conservation programs. This pilot field study assessed knowledge, attitudes, and behavior regarding use of hearing protective devices in a largely Hispanic group of 88 workers exposed to industrial noise. Effectiveness of hearing protection was determined through field measurements of personal attenuation ratings. Individual scores on an acculturation scale (first language learned, language at home, degree of literacy in English, preferred language) demonstrated a correlation between a low degree of acculturation and low personal attenuation rating (R2= 0.49, p=0.0001). Low acculturation was also correlated with high-perceived barriers to use of hearing protection (p=0.006). Although neither self reports of self-efficacy nor perceived benefits of hearing protection correlated with personal attenuation rating, perceived barriers to hearing protector use was a significant predictor of hearing protector fit (p=0.05). These results indicate that less acculturated workers may be underutilizing hearing protection in the workplace partly due to perceived barriers to use of hearing protective devices. To be effective, hearing conservation training programs in work sites with an immigrant work force need to address language and cultural barriers to the use of hearing protection.

Noise-induced hearing loss.

Hearing loss caused by exposure to recreational and occupational noise results in devastating disability that is virtually 100 percent preventable. Noise-induced hearing loss is the second most common form of sensorineural hearing deficit, after presbycusis (age-related hearing loss). Shearing forces caused by any sound have an impact on the stereocilia of the hair cells of the basilar membrane of the cochlea; when excessive, these forces can cause cell death. Avoiding noise exposure stops further progression of the damage. Noise-induced hearing loss can be prevented by avoiding excessive noise and using hearing protection such as earplugs and earmuffs. Patients who have been exposed to excessive noise should be screened. When hearing loss is suspected, a thorough history, physical examination and audiometry should be performed. If these examinations disclose evidence of hearing loss, referral for full audiologic evaluation is recommended.