An algorithm for quantitatively estimating occupational endotoxin exposure in the Biomarkers of Exposure and Effect in Agriculture (BEEA) study: I. Development of task-specific exposure levels from published data.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Farmers conduct numerous tasks with potential for endotoxin exposure. As a first step to characterize endotoxin exposure for farmers in the Biomarkers of Exposure and Effect in Agriculture (BEEA) Study, we used published data to estimate task-specific endotoxin concentrations. METHODS: We extracted published data on task-specific, personal, inhalable endotoxin concentrations for agricultural tasks queried in the study questionnaire. The data, usually abstracted as summary measures, were evaluated using meta-regression models that weighted each geometric mean (GM, natural-log transformed) by the inverse of its within-study variance to obtain task-specific predicted GMs. RESULTS: We extracted 90 endotoxin summary statistics from 26 studies for 9 animal-related tasks, 30 summary statistics from 6 studies for 3 crop-related tasks, and 10 summary statistics from 5 studies for 4 stored grain-related tasks. Work in poultry and swine confinement facilities, grinding feed, veterinarian services, and cleaning grain bins had predicted GMs > 1000 EU/m3 . In contrast, harvesting or hauling grain and other crop-related tasks had predicted GMs below 100 EU/m3 . SIGNIFICANCE: These task-specific endotoxin GMs demonstrated exposure variability across common agricultural tasks. These estimates will be used in conjunction with questionnaire responses on task duration to quantitatively estimate endotoxin exposure for study participants, described in a companion paper.

A Task-Specific Algorithm to Estimate Occupational (1→3)-ß-D-glucan Exposure for Farmers in the Biomarkers of Exposure and Effect in Agriculture Study.

OBJECTIVES: Farmers may be exposed to glucans (a cell component of molds) through a variety of tasks. The magnitude of exposure depends on each farmer's activities and their duration. We developed a task-specific algorithm to estimate glucan exposure that combines measurements of (1→3)-ß-D-glucan with questionnaire responses from farmers in the Biomarkers of Exposure and Effect in Agriculture (BEEA) study. METHODS: To develop the algorithm, we first derived task-based geometric means (GMs) of glucan exposure for farming tasks using inhalable personal air sampling data from a prior air monitoring study in a subset of 32 BEEA farmers. Next, these task-specific GMs were multiplied by subject-reported activity frequencies for three time windows (the past 30 days, past 7 days, and past 1 day) to obtain subject-, task-, and time window-specific glucan scores. These were summed together to obtain a total glucan score for each subject and time window. We examined the within- and between-task correlation in glucan scores for different time frames. Additionally, we assessed the algorithm for the 'past 1 day' time window using full-shift concentrations from the 32 farmers who participated in air monitoring the day prior to an interview using multilevel statistical models to compare the measured glucan concentration with algorithm glucan scores. RESULTS: We focused on the five highest exposed tasks: poultry confinement (300 ng/m3), swine confinement (300 ng/m3), clean grain bins (200 ng/m3), grind feed (100 ng/m3), and stored seed or grain (50 ng/m3); the remaining tasks were <50 ng/m3 and had similar concentrations to each other. Overall, 67% of the participants reported at least one of these tasks. The most prevalent task was stored seed or grain (64%). The highest median glucan scores were observed for poultry confinement and swine confinement; these tasks were reported by 2% and 8% of the participants, respectively. The correlation between scores for the same task but different time windows was high for swine confinement and poultry confinement, but low for clean grain bins. Task-specific scores had low correlation with other tasks. Prior day glucan concentration was associated with the total glucan 'past 1 day' score and with swine confinement and clean grain bin task scores. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides insight into the variability and key sources of glucan exposure in a US farming population. It also provides a framework for better glucan exposure assessment in epidemiologic studies and is a crucial starting point for evaluating health risks associated with glucans in future epidemiologic evaluations of this population.

Observed vs. self-reported agricultural activities: Evaluating 24-hr recall in a pilot study.

Few studies have evaluated the validity of self-report of work activities because of challenges in obtaining objective measures. In this study, farmers' recall of the previous day's agricultural activities was compared to activities observed by field staff during air monitoring. Recall was assessed in 32 farmers from the Biomarkers of Exposure and Effect in Agriculture Study, a subset of a prospective cohort study. The farmers participated in 56 visits that comprised air monitoring the day before an interview. The answers for 14 agricultural activities were compared to activities observed by field staff during air monitoring (median duration 380 min, range 129-486). For each task, evaluated as yes/no, overall agreement, sensitivity, specificity, and kappa were calculated. Median prevalence of the 14 activities was 8% from observation and 13% from participants (range: 2-54%). Agreement was generally good to perfect, with a median overall agreement of 95% (range: 89-100%), median sensitivity of 84% (50-100%), median specificity of 95% (88-100%), and median kappa of 0.65 (0.31-1.0). Reasons for disagreement included activities occurring when the field staff was not present (i.e., milking cows), unclear timing notes that made it difficult to determine whether the activity occurred the day of and/or day before the interview, definition issues (i.e., participant included hauling in the definition of harvesting), and difficulty in observing details of an activity (i.e., whether hay was moldy). This study provides support for accurate participant recall the day after activities.