Occupational causes of hypersensitivity pneumonitis: a systematic review and compendium.

BACKGROUND: Hypersensitivity pneumonitis (HP) is caused by a variety of antigens and low-molecular-weight chemicals, often through occupational exposure. Making a diagnosis of HP and identifying a cause are challenging. Cryptogenic cases are frequently reported, and missing or incomplete exposure histories can cause misclassification. AIMS: To provide an evidence-based compendium of sources of exposure and causes of HP for the clinician, through systematic review of medical literature. METHODS: Articles related to HP causative agents and occupational exposure were searched from the databases OVID Medline (1946 to October 2020) and EMBASE (1974 to October 2020). Abstracts and full texts of articles were screened by two reviewers. Data on causative antigens, occupational source of exposure and any associated eponymous name were extracted and grouped according to source of exposure. RESULTS: A total of 1790 articles were identified, from which 305 articles met the inclusion criteria. An additional 22 articles were identified from citation lists of the selected review articles. Sources of exposure identified for HP were sorted into 14 categories of work (agricultural, plant matter processing, wood, animal-related, foodstuff, food processing, metal processing, polymers, other manufacturing, chemicals, aerosolized water, service, waste and sewage and wind instruments). CONCLUSIONS: This work is a comprehensive list of occupational causative agents and exposures causing HP. Cases are grouped by source of exposure, allowing an immediately accessible compendium of causes for use during occupational exposure assessment, which could also form the basis for a clinical questionnaire.

Needlestick injuries among Malaysian healthcare workers.

BACKGROUND: Needlestick injury (NSI) is a significant occupational health issue among healthcare workers (HCWs). AIMS: To determine the national self-reported incidence and risk factors for NSI among Malaysian Ministry of Health (MOH) HCWs. METHODS: Using data from the MOH national sharps injury surveillance programme, information on reported NSIs over a 1-year period (2016) for different HCW subgroups were extracted and analysed. RESULTS: A total of 1234 NSI cases were reported in 2016, giving an overall incidence of 6 injuries per 1000 HCWs. Medical doctors recorded the highest incidence (21.1 per 1000 HCWs) followed by dental staff (7.5), pharmacy staff (4.2), nurses (3.7), medical assistants (3.4) and allied and auxiliary staff (1.0). Doctors had significantly increased risk of NSI compared with allied and auxiliary staff (relative risk [RR] = 20.7, 95% confidence interval [CI] 15.5-27.5), medical assistants (RR = 6.1, 95% CI 4.5-8.2), nurses (RR = 5.7, 95% CI 5.0-6.6), pharmacy staff (RR = 5.0, 95% CI 3.7-6.6) and dental staff (RR = 2.8, 95% CI 2.2-3.5). Significant differences were found in age and sharps- handling experience between occupational subgroups (P < 0.001 for both variables). Male employees had higher risk than females (RR = 1.33, 95% CI 1.18-1.50), with a significant difference seen in their sharps-handling experience (P < 0.01). Important risk factors included unsafe practices such as recapping of needles and their improper disposal. CONCLUSIONS: The national incidence of NSI amongst Malaysian HCWs was lower compared with other countries, but unsafe practices remain an important concern. There is a need to formulate, implement and monitor safe and consistent practices for the different healthcare professionals.

Development of an occupational airborne chemical exposure matrix.

BACKGROUND: Population-based studies of the occupational contribution to chronic obstructive pulmonary disease generally rely on self-reported exposures to vapours, gases, dusts and fumes (VGDF), which are susceptible to misclassification. AIMS: To develop an airborne chemical job exposure matrix (ACE JEM) for use with the UK Standard Occupational Classification (SOC 2000) system. METHODS: We developed the ACE JEM in stages: (i) agreement of definitions, (ii) a binary assignation of exposed/not exposed to VGDF, fibres or mists (VGDFFiM), for each of the individual 353 SOC codes and (iii) assignation of levels of exposure (L; low, medium and high) and (iv) the proportion of workers (P) likely to be exposed in each code. We then expanded the estimated exposures to include biological dusts, mineral dusts, metals, diesel fumes and asthmagens. RESULTS: We assigned 186 (53%) of all SOC codes as exposed to at least one category of VGDFFiM, with 23% assigned as having medium or high exposure. We assigned over 68% of all codes as not being exposed to fibres, gases or mists. The most common exposure was to dusts (22% of codes with >50% exposed); 12% of codes were assigned exposure to fibres. We assigned higher percentages of the codes as exposed to diesel fumes (14%) compared with metals (8%). CONCLUSIONS: We developed an expert-derived JEM, using a strict set of a priori defined rules. The ACE JEM could also be applied to studies to assess risks of diseases where the main route of occupational exposure is via inhalation.

Protection afforded by controlled application of a barrier cream: a study in a workplace setting.

BACKGROUND: Skin protective creams (PCs) are used widely in industrial work environments to prevent irritant contact dermatitis. However, workplace studies remain equivocal in terms of their effectiveness, which may be partly owing to whether the PC remains on the skin. OBJECTIVES: To assess the practicability of using skin occlusion testing in a workplace as a method to determine whether PCs applied under controlled conditions can reduce skin damage against known irritants. This study also compares two methods of skin evaluation: clinical dermatological assessment and bioengineering techniques. METHODS: Daily occlusion testing for 1 h (over two consecutive weeks) was conducted in an engineering company on the volar forearm of 21 healthy volunteer engineers with sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) and a PC that was used on site. The engineers conducted their normal work activities during the occlusion testing period. The skin areas tested were assessed using transepidermal water loss (TEWL), Chroma Meter and by visual dermatological scoring. RESULTS: Testing with PC and SLS together showed that PC does not prevent irritant contact dermatitis but significantly reduced skin damage compared with SLS alone (P < 0.01). The changes in skin were evident earlier with the biophysical measurements when compared with the dermatological assessment. CONCLUSIONS: Occlusion testing is a useful method for assessing the potential effectiveness of protective creams and can be used in a workplace without affecting work practices. TEWL and the Chroma Meter provide useful objective information and should be used in combination with dermatological examinations.

Complications after prominent ear correction: A systematic review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: There is great diversity in reported post-operative outcomes for otoplasty, with the incidence of haematoma or infection ranging from 0% to 15.6% and 0%-10%, respectively. With such variability, it is difficult to determine an overall 'average' incidence of common post-operative complications. METHODS: A systematic review of the most relevant medical databases was conducted for studies available in English published between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2015. Using the dataset, pooled estimates for the incidence of the primary and secondary outcomes were calculated for all included studies. The primary outcome was haematoma and/or bleeding incidence, and the secondary outcomes included infection, skin/wound healing problems, suture-related problems, scarring, pain and itching, and revision surgeries/recurrence. Comparable sub-group analysis of studies was also performed using calculated pooled proportions. RESULTS: After screening, 28 articles involving 3493 patients were included in the study. Pooled proportions revealed that haematoma and/or bleeding incidence was 2.5% (95% CI: 1.4-3.8%), infection 0.8% (95% CI: 0.4-1.3%), skin/wound healing problems 3% (95% CI: 1.4-5.1%), suture-related problems 1.8% (95% CI: 0.8-3.2%), scarring 1.6% (95% CI: 0.8-2.6%), pain and itching 13% (95% CI: 5.4-23.1%) and revision surgeries/recurrence 5% (95% CI: 2.9-7.7%). CONCLUSIONS: By pooling proportions of reported complications, the results of this study could be useful in the personal audit of practice and will be a point of reference for comparing novel surgical techniques in the future.