Rates and occupational characteristics of international seafarers with mental illness.

BACKGROUND: Seafarers enable 90% of global commerce, working in isolation from social support and medical care. While occupational conditions of isolation may suggest possible excess risk of mental illness and suicide, research on seafarer mental illness is limited. AIMS: To describe seafarers with mental illness and associated incidence rates in a large population of international seafarers. METHODS: We used mental illness claims data from a large international marine insurance provider arising from working seafarers during the years 2007-15. We used descriptive statistics and calculated mental illness incidence rates in this seafarer population. RESULTS: There were 278 seafarer mental illness claims in the study data. Claims were more often reported in deck workers (46%) and ratings (58%). The crude mental illness rate was 3.9 per 100 000 person-years. CONCLUSIONS: Using objective data on a large seafaring population, our analysis highlights the important issue of mental illness in this isolated and underserved international workforce. The low observed mental illness claims rate is likely due to the high threshold for claims reporting.

Bronchial hyper-responsiveness: a technical update.

BACKGROUND: Bronchial hyper-responsiveness (BHR) is often regarded as a 'hallmark' of asthma, and bronchoprovocation testing is frequently performed to support a diagnosis of asthma. The European Respiratory Society (ERS) and American Thoracic Society (ATS) have recently updated their technical standards and guidelines for performing methacholine challenge testing (MCT), the most commonly performed clinical test of BHR. AIMS: To review the updated guidelines and discuss the various changes and their potential impact on clinicians. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of references identified using Medline and hand searches of identified articles. RESULTS: The new ERS and ATS guidelines recommend that MCT be performed using tidal breathing, not deep inspirations with breath holding, that results be reported as the PD20 (cumulative dose causing a 20% fall in forced expiratory volume in 1 s [FEV1]), rather than PC20 (concentration causing a 20% fall in FEV1), and that manufacturers of nebulizers and other delivery systems provide performance characteristics to allow calculation of PD20 values. Our preliminary survey found that the new guidelines are only slowly being adopted. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians should be aware that recommended BHR testing methods, particularly for MCT, have changed. As a result, they should anticipate that test outcomes will increasingly be reported in terms of PD20, which will facilitate longitudinal assessment of their patients. Compliance with the new guidelines will increase the sensitivity of MCT in mild and asymptomatic asthmatics.

Bronchial hyperresponsiveness.

BACKGROUND: Bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR) is often regarded as a 'hallmark' of asthma and bronchoprovocation testing is frequently performed to support a diagnosis of asthma. However, BHR is also found in a spectrum of other lung diseases and can be provoked by a variety of specific stimuli. AIMS: To review the pathophysiology of BHR, discuss various methods of testing for BHR and describe the epidemiology of BHR in a variety of previously studied populations. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of references identified using Medline and hand searches of identified articles. Because of space limitations, we have included those reports that seem most representative of the overall BHR literature. RESULTS: BHR can be induced by a variety of stimuli that trigger a number of different but overlapping physiological mechanisms. Bronchoprovocation testing can be performed using a variety of stimuli, various protocols and differing test criteria, yielding results that may be discordant. Elevated rates of BHR have been reported in studies of smokers, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease patients, atopics, athletes, exposed workers and the general population. CONCLUSIONS: Due to the prevalence of BHR in a spectrum of clinical patients and working populations, clinicians should be aware that BHR is not specific for asthma. When performed correctly, the greatest clinical value of BHR testing is to rule out suspected asthma in patients in whom testing is negative. Assessment of BHR also provides insights into the pathological mechanisms of airway disease.