Search

Background The Health and Safety Executive's new Health and Work Strategy is based on an up-to-date assessment of workplace health priorities. Rather than replicating traditional prioritization approaches, a broader assessment of health and work priorities was carried out using a range of stakeholders. Aims To develop a set of health priorities for further research and intervention activity. Methods Four exercises were carried out, including internal prioritization, two external web-hosted questionnaire studies of younger workers and occupational health professionals, focus groups and tele-depth interviews with workplace health and safety professionals. Results The highest rated internal priorities (weighted priority scores) were identified as mesothelioma (70), lung cancer (69.25), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD; 69), musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs; 66.25), hearing loss (65.75), stress (65.5), asthma (64.5) and hand-arm vibration syndrome (61.5). Using the three highest ranked criteria developed by occupational health professionals ((i) the preventability of the condition, (ii) the impact of the condition and (iii) the number of workers affected), mesothelioma, lung cancer, COPD, MSDs, hearing loss, stress and asthma were identified as the top seven priorities. Generic issues identified included ageing and work, obesity, newer technologies, and ethnicity and cultures of workforces. Apprentices identified stress, depression, anxiety, musculoskeletal and respiratory disorders, fatigue and workload as important workplace health considerations. Conclusions This process identified a number of expected and new areas of health research interest. We believe the findings reflect the real world requirements of work as assessed by occupational health and safety practitioners and workers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Wood dust is a common cause of occupational asthma. There is potential for high exposure to wood dust during furniture and wood manufacturing processes. Aims To evaluate the evidence for non-neoplastic respiratory ill health associated with work in the furniture and wood manufacturing sector. Methods A systematic review was performed according to PRISMA guidelines. Articles were graded using SIGN (Scottish Intercollegiate Guideline Network) and MERGE (Methods for Evaluating Research Guidelines and Evidence) criteria, with data grouped by study outcome. Results Initial searches identified 1328 references, from which 55 articles were included in the review. Fourteen studies were graded A using MERGE or >2++ using SIGN. All but one paper describing airway symptoms reported an increased risk in higher wood dust exposed workers in comparison to lower or non-exposed groups. Five studies reporting asthma examined dose response; three found a positive effect. The relative risk for asthma in exposed workers in the single meta-analysis was 1.5 (95% CI 1.25-1.87). Two studies reported more obstructive lung function (forced expiratory volume in 1 s [FEV1]/forced vital capacity < 0.7) in exposed populations. Excess longitudinal FEV1 decline was reported in female smokers with high wood dust exposures in one study population. Where measured, work-related respiratory symptoms did not clearly relate to specific wood immunoglobulin E positivity. Conclusions Work in this sector was associated with a significantly increased risk of respiratory symptoms and asthma. The evidence for wood dust exposure causing impaired lung function is less clearly established. Further study is required to better understand the prevalence, and causes, of respiratory problems within this sector. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Cotton dust sampling for monitoring worker exposure was traditionally performed by work area sampling. A change to an exposure limit based on personal sampling has recently been agreed. The choice of sampling head for personal monitoring exposure was hampered by the use of two different sampling heads in the major epidemiological studies of textile workers which had incorporated personal sampling techniques. The purpose of this study was to compare the results of exposure measurements using these two sampling heads.This study has examined the performance of the two sampling heads, by performing dual sampling on cotton operatives during normal working activities. Each operative included wore two samplers randomly allocated to left or right side. A minimum of 200 minutes of sampling was accepted and the relative concentrations calculated.The IOM total dust sampler produced repeatedly higher measurements than the Manchester head. The ratio overall was 1.33 (95% C.I. 1.20–1.49). The performance was similar across three ranges of dust exposure from low (<1 mg/m3–ratio 1.28), medium 1–3 mg/m3–ratio 1.43) to high exposure (>3 mg/m3–ratio 1.24).The two heads give reproducibly proportionate dust measurements with approximately 30% greater results obtained with the IOM total dust sampler. Either dust sampling head could be used for worker monitoring and the results adjusted accordingly for reference to the Maximum Exposure Limit. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]