Search

Background: Office work has a relative perception of safety for the worker. Data from surveillance schemes and population-based epidemiological studies suggest that office work carries a low risk of occupational asthma (OA). Office workers are frequently used as comparators in studies of occupational exposure and respiratory disease., Aims: We aimed to describe and illustrate our tertiary clinical experience of diagnosing OA in office workers., Methods: We searched the Birmingham NHS Occupational Lung Disease Service clinical database for cases of occupational respiratory disease diagnosed between 2002 and 2020, caused by office work or in office workers. For patients with OA, we gathered existing data on demographics, diagnostic tests including Occupational Asthma SYStem (OASYS) analysis of serial peak expiratory flow and specific inhalational challenge, and employment outcome. We summarised data and displayed them alongside illustrative cases., Results: There were 47 cases of OA (5% of all asthma) confirmed using OASYS analysis of PEFs in the majority. Sixty percent of cases occurred in healthcare, education and government sectors. The most frequently implicated causative exposures or agents were: indoor air (9), printing, copying and laminating (7), cleaning chemicals (4), mould and damp (4), and acrylic flooring and adhesives (4). Exposures were grouped into internal office environment, office ventilation-related and adjacent environment., Conclusions: Clinicians should be vigilant for exposures associated with OA in office workers who present with work-related symptoms, where respiratory sensitizing agents may be present. A structured approach to assessment of the workplace is recommended., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society of Occupational Medicine. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Purpose: Occupational exposures are a common cause of adult-onset asthma; rapid removal from exposure to the causative agent offers the best chance of a good outcome. Despite this, occupational asthma (OA) is widely underdiagnosed. We aimed to see whether chances of diagnosis were missed during acute hospital attendances in the period between symptom onset and the diagnosis of OA., Methods: Patients diagnosed with OA at the regional occupational lung disease service in Birmingham between 2007 and 2018 whose home address had a Birmingham postcode were included. Emergency department (ED) attendances and acute admission data were retrieved from acute hospitals in the Birmingham conurbation for the period between symptom onset and diagnosis., Results: OA was diagnosed in 406 patients, 147 having a Birmingham postcode. Thirty-four percent (50/147) had acute hospital attendances to a Birmingham conurbation hospital preceding their diagnosis of OA, including 35 (24%) with respiratory illnesses, which resulted in referral for investigation of possible OA in 2/35. The median delay between symptom onset and diagnosis of OA was 30 months (IQR = 13-60) and between first hospital attendance with respiratory illness and diagnosis 12 months (IQR = 12-48, range 3-96 months) CONCLUSIONS: The chance to reduce the delay in the diagnosis of OA was missed in 33/35 patients admitted or seen in ED with respiratory symptoms in the period between symptom onset and diagnosis of OA. The diagnosis of OA was delayed by a median of 12 months by failure to ask about employment and work relationship of symptoms.

Background: Evidence-based reviews have found that evidence for the efficacy of respiratory protective equipment (RPE) in the management of occupational asthma (OA) is lacking., Aims: To quantify the effectiveness of air-fed RPE in workers with sensitizer-induced OA exposed to metal-working fluid aerosols in a car engine and transmission manufacturing facility., Methods: All workers from an outbreak of metal-working fluid-induced OA who had continuing peak expiratory flow (PEF) evidence of sensitizer-induced OA after steam cleaning and replacement of all metal-working fluid were included. Workers kept 2-hourly PEF measurements at home and work, before and after a strictly enforced programme of RPE with air-fed respirators with charcoal filters. The area-between-curve (ABC) score from the Oasys plotter was used to assess the effectiveness of the RPE., Results: Twenty workers met the inclusion criteria. Records were kept for a mean of 24.6 day shifts and rest days before and 24.7 after the institution of RPE. The ABC score improved from 26.6 (SD 16.2) to 17.7 (SD 25.4) l/min/h (P > 0.05) post-RPE; however, work-related decline was <15 l/min/h in only 12 of 20 workers, despite increased asthma treatment in 5 workers., Conclusions: Serial PEF measurements assessed with the ABC score from the Oasys system allowed quantification of the effect of RPE in sensitized workers. The RPE reduced falls in PEF associated with work exposure, but this was rarely complete. This study suggests that RPE use cannot be relied on to replace source control in workers with OA, and that monitoring post-RPE introduction is needed., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society of Occupational Medicine. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Healthcare practice in the UK has moved away from using aldehyde disinfectants for the decontamination of endoscopes, in part due to the risk of respiratory sensitization. Peracetic acid (PAA) in combination with hydrogen peroxide (HP) is a commonly used alternative., Aim: We describe a case of occupational asthma (OA) diagnosed at our specialist occupational lung disease clinic and caused by occupational exposure to PAA-HP mixture, used as a disinfectant in an endoscope washer-disinfector machine., Case Report: A 48-year-old man employed as a mycologist and environmental microbiologist at a Birmingham city hospital, UK, presented following an acute exposure to PAA-HP mixture causing lacrimation, burning optic pain and headache. He had also experienced symptoms suggestive of OA for the preceding 10 months, and the diagnosis was confirmed through OASYS analysis of serial peak expiratory flow measurements. He had been exposed to PAA-HP mixture whilst working in the endoscopy department for 12 months prior to the acute episode, and a subsequent specific inhalation challenge test was positive with a late asthmatic response to PAA-HP mixture., Conclusion: This case provides evidence for a sensitization mechanism in OA caused by PAA-HP mixture., (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society of Occupational Medicine. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Cleaning agents are now a common cause of occupational asthma (OA) worldwide. Irritant airway and sensitization mechanisms are implicated for a variety of old and new agents., Aims: To describe the exposures responsible for cleaning agent OA diagnosed within a UK specialist occupational lung disease service between 2000 and 2016., Methods: The Birmingham NHS Occupational Lung Disease Service clinical database was searched for cases of OA caused by cleaning agents, and data were gathered on age, gender, atopic status, smoking history, symptom onset, diagnostic investigations (including Occupational Asthma SYStem analysis of workplace serial peak expiratory flow measurements and specific inhalational challenge), proposed mechanism, industry, occupation and causative agent., Results: Eighty patients with cleaning agent OA (77% female, 76% arising de novo) were identified. The median annual number of cases was 4 (interquartile range = 2-7). The commonest cleaning agents causing OA were chloramines (31%), glutaraldehyde (26%) and quaternary ammonium compounds (11%) and frequently implicated industries were healthcare (55%), education (18%) and leisure (8%)., Conclusions: Certain cleaning agents in common usage, such as chlorine-releasing agents, quaternary ammonium compounds and aldehydes, are associated with sensitization and asthma. Their use alters over time, and this is particularly evident in UK healthcare where cleaning and decontamination practice and policy have changed. Vigilance for OA in workplaces such as hospitals, nursing homes, leisure centres and swimming pools, where these cleaning agents are regularly used, is therefore essential.

Specific inhalation challenge (SIC) is the diagnostic reference standard for occupational asthma; however, a positive test cannot be considered truly significant unless it can be reproduced by usual work exposures. We have compared the timing and responses during SIC in hospital to Oasys analysis of serial peak expiratory flow (PEF) during usual work exposures.All workers with a positive SIC to occupational agents between 2006 and 2015 were asked to measure PEF every 2 h from waking to sleeping for 4 weeks during usual occupational exposures. Responses were compared between the laboratory challenge and the real-world exposures at work.All 53 workers with positive SIC were included. 49 out of 53 had records suitable for Oasys analysis, 14 required more than one attempt and all confirmed occupational work-related changes in PEF. Immediate SIC reactors and deterioration within the first 2 h of starting work were significantly correlated with early recovery, and late SIC reactors and a delayed start to workplace deterioration were significantly correlated with delayed recovery. Dual SIC reactions had features of immediate or late SIC reactions at work rather than dual reactions.The concordance of timings of reactions during SIC and at work provides further validation for the clinical significance of each test., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: None declared., (Copyright ©ERS 2018.)

Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared.

Background: Acrylic monomers (acrylates), methacrylates and cyanoacrylates all cause asthma by respiratory sensitization. Occupational inhalation exposures occur across a variety of industries including health care and dental work, beauty, laboratory science, assembly and plastic moulding., Aims: To examine notifications of occupational asthma caused by acrylic compounds from a UK-based regional surveillance scheme, in order to highlight prevalent exposures and trends in presentation., Methods: Retrospective review of all cases reported to the SHIELD surveillance scheme for occupational asthma, West Midlands, UK between 1989 and 2014. Patient data were gathered on demographics, employment, asthma symptoms and diagnostic investigations including serum immunological testing, serial peak flow analysis and specific inhalation challenge tests. Descriptive statistics were used to illustrate worker characteristics and evidence for sensitization to acrylic compounds., Results: There were 20 affected patients out of 1790 total cases of occupational asthma (1%); all cases were confirmed by OASYS (Occupational Asthma SYStem) analysis of serial peak flow measurements, with three additional positive specific inhalation challenge tests. Three out of 20 (15%) patients were current smokers and 11/20 (55%) were atopic. A variety of exposures and industries were implicated including: manufacturing, health care, beauty and printing and a novel presentation seen in teachers exposed to floor adhesives., Conclusions: This is the largest reported series of occupational asthma caused by acrylic compounds, which remain an important aetiological factor in this disease. Exposure occurs in a variety of industries, particularly in manufacturing and is seen with other, perhaps better recognized sensitizing agents such as isocyanates and epoxy resins., (© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society of Occupational Medicine. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com)

Introduction: Since 2000 a decline in the incidence of occupational asthma (OA) has been reported in the UK and Europe. We aimed to describe and account for trends in the incidence of OA in the West Midlands, UK using annual notification data from the SHIELD voluntary surveillance scheme over the period 1991-2011., Methods: All notifications to the SHIELD database between January 1991 and December 2011 were identified, along with patients' demographic data, occupations, causative agents and confirmatory tests. Annual notifications were scaled to give an annual count per million workers, giving a measure of incidence, and also standardised against those of bakers' asthma. Non-parametric analyses were undertaken between annual incidence and time (years) for common causative agents using (1) a negative binomial regression univariate model and (2) a logistic regression model calculating annual reporting ORs. A step-change analysis was used to examine time points at which there were marked reductions in incidence., Results: A decrease in annual incidence of OA was observed over the study period (incident rate ratio=0.945; 95% CI 0.933 to 0.957; p<0.0001), an effect that was lost after standardising for bakers' asthma. Decreases in incidence were seen for most common causative agents, with only cleaning product-related OA increasing over 21 years. Marked fall in incidence was seen in 2004 for isocyanates, and in 1995 for latex. Most notifications came from a regional specialist occupational lung disease unit, with notifications from other sites falling from 16 cases/million workers/annum in 1995 to 0 in 2004., Conclusions: Reporter fatigue and increasing under-recognition of OA are both factors which contribute to the apparent fall in incidence of OA in the West Midlands. There is a future need for interventions that enable health professionals to identify potential cases of OA in the workplace and in healthcare settings., (Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.)

Introduction: Long delays from symptom onset to the diagnosis of occupational asthma have been reported in the UK, Europe and Canada and workers are often reluctant to seek medical help or workplace solutions for their symptoms. Reducing this delay could improve workers' quality of life, and reduce the societal cost of occupational asthma. This study aimed to explore reasons behind such delays., Methods: A purposive sample of 20 individuals diagnosed with, or under investigation for, occupational asthma (median age = 52; 70% male; 80% white British) undertook a single semi-structured interview. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and thematic analysis was undertaken in order to explore health beliefs and identify barriers to diagnosis., Results: Four themes were identified: (1) workers' understanding of symptoms, (2) working relationships, (3) workers' course of action and (4) workers' negotiation with healthcare professionals. Understanding of symptoms varied between individuals, from a lack of insight into the onset, pattern and nature of symptoms, through to misunderstanding of what they represented, or ignorance of the existence of asthma as a disease entity. Workers described reluctance to discuss health issues with managers and peers, through fear of job loss and a perceived lack of ability to find a solution. The evolution of workers' understanding depended upon how actively they looked to define symptoms or seek a solution. Proactive workers were motivated to seek authoritative help and negotiate inadequate healthcare encounters with GPs., Conclusion: Understanding workers' health beliefs will enable policy makers and clinicians to develop better workplace interventions that may aid diagnosis and reduce delay in identifying occupational asthma., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Cobalt asthma has previously been described in cobalt production workers, diamond polishers and glassware manufacturers., Aims: To describe a case series of occupational asthma (OA) due to cobalt, identified at the Birmingham Heartlands Occupational Lung Disease Unit, West Midlands, UK., Methods: Cases of cobalt asthma from a West Midlands' manufacturer of automotive engine valves, diagnosed between 1996 and 2005, were identified from the SHIELD database of OA. Case note data on demographics, employment status, asthma symptoms and diagnostic tests, including spirometry, peak expiratory flow (PEF) measurements, skin prick testing (SPT) and specific inhalational challenge (SIC) tests to cobalt chloride, were gathered, and descriptive statistics used to illustrate the data., Results: The natural history of presentations has been described in detail, as well as a case study of one of the affected workers. Fourteen metalworkers (86% male; mean age 44.9 years) were diagnosed with cobalt asthma between 1996 and 2005. Workers were principally stellite grinders, stellite welders or machine setter-operators. All workers had positive Occupational Asthma SYStem analyses of serial PEF measurements, and sensitization to cobalt chloride was demonstrated in nine workers, by SPT or SIC., Conclusions: We have described a series of 14 workers with cobalt asthma from the automotive manufacturing industry, with objective evidence for sensitization. Health care workers should remain vigilant for cobalt asthma in the automotive manufacturing industry., (© The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society of Occupational Medicine. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

This consensus statement provides practical recommendations for specific inhalation challenge (SIC) in the diagnosis of occupational asthma. They are derived from a systematic literature search, a census of active European centres, a Delphi conference and expert consensus. This article details each step of a SIC, including safety requirements, techniques for delivering agents, and methods for assessing and interpreting bronchial responses. The limitations of the procedure are also discussed. Testing should only be carried out in hospitals where physicians and healthcare professionals have appropriate expertise. Tests should always include a control challenge, a gradual increase of exposure to the suspected agent, and close monitoring of the patient during the challenge and for at least 6 h afterwards. In expert centres, excessive reactions provoked by SIC are rare. A positive response is defined by a fall in forced expiratory volume in 1 s ≥ 15% from baseline. Equivocal reactions can sometimes be clarified by finding changes in nonspecific bronchial responsiveness, sputum eosinophils or exhaled nitric oxide. The sensitivity and specificity of SIC are high but not easily quantified, as the method is usually used as the reference standard for the diagnosis of occupational asthma., (©ERS 2014.)

Background: There is a disproportionately high number of cases of work-related asthma occurring in health care occupations due to agents such as glutaraldehyde, latex and cleaning products., Aims: To understand the causes and measure trends over time of occupational asthma (OA) in health care workers (HCWs)., Methods: We reviewed OA notifications from the Midland Thoracic Society's Surveillance Scheme of Occupational Asthma (SHIELD) database in the West Midlands, UK, from 1991 to 2011 and gathered data on occupation, causative agent and annual number of notifications., Results: There were 182 cases of OA in HCWs (median annual notifications = 7; interquartile range [IQR] = 5-11), representing 5-19% of annual SHIELD notifications. The modal annual notification was 20 (in 1996); notifications have declined since then, in line with total SHIELD notifications. The majority of cases (136; 75%) occurred in nursing, operating theatre, endoscopy and radiology staff. The most frequently implicated agents were glutaraldehyde (n = 69), latex (n = 47) and cleaning products (n = 27), accounting for 79% of the 182 cases. Cleaning product-related OA was an emerging cause with 22 cases after 2001 and only 5 cases between 1991 and 2000., Conclusions: Control measures within the UK National Health Service have seen a decline in OA in HCWs due to latex and glutaraldehyde, though OA remains a problem amongst HCWs exposed to cleaning products. Continuing efforts are required to limit the number of cases in this employment sector.

Background: Five metal turners employed by an aerospace manufacturer presented to the Birmingham Chest Clinic occupational lung disease unit. Four cases of occupational asthma (OA) due to chromium salt (3) and cobalt (1) were diagnosed by serial peak-expiratory flow measurements and specific inhalation challenge testing., Aims: To measure the extent of the outbreak and to provide epidemiological data to ascertain the aetiology., Methods: Participants answered a detailed, self-administered questionnaire, designed to detect occupational lung disease. Urine chromium and cobalt excretion, spirometry and exhaled nitric oxide measurements were taken. Those with possible, probable or definite non-OA or OA, after questionnaire, were invited to undertake two-hourly peak flow measurements and received specialist follow-up., Results: A total of 62 workers (95% of workforce) participated. Sixty-one per cent of employees were working in higher metalworking fluid (MWF) exposure areas. Ninety per cent of workers had urinary chromium excretion indicating occupational exposure. Sixty-six per cent of workers reported active respiratory symptoms, although there were no significant differences between exposure groups. Two further workers with probable OA were identified and had significantly higher urinary chromium and cobalt concentration than asymptomatic controls. Eighteen cases of occupational rhinitis (OR) were identified, with significantly raised urinary chromium concentration compared with asymptomatic controls., Conclusions: Chromium salt and cobalt can be responsible for OA and OR in workers exposed to MWF aerosols. Onset of symptoms in those with positive specific challenges followed change in MWF brand. Workers with OA had increased urinary concentrations of chromium and cobalt, and those with OR had increased urinary concentrations of chromium.

Background: Diurnal variation (DV) affects lung function but the changes are thought to be related to sleep patterns rather than time of day. When diagnosing occupational asthma (OA), serial peak expiratory flow (PEF) measurements are the recommended first line investigation, but could be confounded by shift work., Aims: The aim of the study was to investigate the effects of shift work on PEF measurements used for diagnosing OA., Methods: PEF records containing more than one shift pattern with ≥ 4 days per shift were identified. OA diagnosis was based on an Oasys-2 score ≥ 2.51 and non-OA on having an alternative clinical diagnosis and Oasys-2 score <2.51. The mean area between curves (ABC) score, mean PEF DV and cross-shift PEF changes were calculated for each shift., Results: Records from 123 workers with OA and 69 without OA satisfied inclusion criteria. In the OA group, PEF declined more on afternoon and night shifts than days (P < 0.001). The ABC score was lower in the OA group on night (P < 0.05) and afternoon shifts (P < 0.05) as compared with days, without significant differences in DV. Among those without OA, cross-shift PEF increased more on day shifts (mean + 25 l/min) than afternoon or night shifts (+1 l/min) (P < 0.001). The sensitivity for the ABC score and DV were good and similar across shifts, but specificity was reduced using DV (DV mean 39%; ABC 98%)., Conclusions: PEF responses between work and rest show small differences according to shift type. The ABC score has a high sensitivity and specificity for all shifts; differences in DV have lower specificity.

The aim of the European Respiratory Society work-related asthma guidelines is to present the management and prevention options of work-related asthma and their effectiveness. Work-related asthma accounts for 5-25% of all adult asthma cases and is responsible for a significant socioeconomic burden. Several hundred occupational agents, mainly allergens but also irritants and substances with unknown pathological mechanisms, have been identified as causing work-related asthma. The essential message of these guidelines is that the management of work-related asthma can be considerably optimised based on the present knowledge of causes, risk factors, pathomechanisms, and realistic and effective interventions. To reach this goal we urgently require greatly intensified primary preventive measures and improved case management. There is now a substantial body of evidence supporting the implementation of comprehensive medical surveillance programmes for workers at risk. Those workers who fail surveillance programmes need to be referred to a clinician who can confirm or exclude an occupational cause. Once work-related asthma is confirmed, a revised risk assessment in the workplace is needed to prevent further cases. These new guidelines confirm and extend already existing statements and recommendations. We hope that these guidelines will initiate the much-needed research that is required to fill the gaps in our knowledge and to initiate substantial improvements in preventative measures.

Background: Acute irritant exposures at work are well-recognized causes of asthma. In the occupational setting, low-dose exposure to the same agent does not provoke asthma. Occupational asthma (OA) with latency due to irritants is not widely accepted., Aims: To compare workers with OA with latency likely to be due to irritant exposures with workers with the more usual sensitization-induced OA., Methods: Following identification of a worker who fulfils all the criteria for irritant-induced OA with latency whose investigation documented lime dust as a cause for his OA, we searched the Shield reporting scheme database between 1989 and 2010 for entries where the OA was more likely to be due to irritant than allergic mechanisms and compared these with the remainder where allergic mechanisms were likely. Outcome measures were latent interval from first exposure to first work-related symptom, non-specific bronchial reactivity, smoking, atopy and the presence of pre-existing asthma., Results: A previously fit lecturer teaching bricklaying had irritant-induced OA with latency without unusual exposures with an immediate asthmatic reaction following exposure to a sand/lime mixture (pH 8). The Shield database identified 127 workers with likely irritant-induced asthma with latency and 1646 with hypersensitivity-induced OA. The two groups were indistinguishable in terms of pre-existing asthma, atopy, age, latent interval, non-specific reactivity and smoking., Conclusions: Irritant exposure is a cause of OA with latency currently clinically indistinguishable from OA due to sensitization.

Work-related asthma, which includes occupational asthma and work-aggravated asthma, has become one of the most prevalent occupational lung diseases. These guidelines aim to upgrade occupational health standards, contribute importantly to transnational legal harmonisation and reduce the high socio-economic burden caused by this disorder. A systematic literature search related to five key questions was performed: diagnostics; risk factors; outcome of management options; medical screening and surveillance; controlling exposure for primary prevention. Each of the 1,329 retrieved papers was reviewed by two experts, followed by Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network grading, and formulation of statements graded according to the Royal College of General Practitioners' three-star system. Recommendations were made on the basis of the evidence-based statements, which comprise the following major evidence-based strategic points. 1) A comprehensive diagnostic approach considering the individual specific aspects is recommended. 2) Early recognition and diagnosis is necessary for timely and appropriate preventative measures. 3) A stratified medical screening strategy and surveillance programme should be applied to at-risk workers. 4) Whenever possible, removing exposure to the causative agent should be achieved, as it leads to the best health outcome. If this is not possible, reduction is the second best option, whereas respirators are of limited value. 5) Exposure elimination should be the preferred primary prevention approach.