Search

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.)

Purpose: Fractional exhaled nitric oxide (FENO) measurements are recommended for the assessment of eosinophilic airway inflammation in asthma. Clinically relevant increases in FENO have been reported 24 h after positive specific inhalational challenge (SIC) tests in occupational asthma. We aimed to determine whether positive SICs could be discriminated from control tests, on the basis of change in FENO., Methods: We reviewed all positive SICs to a variety of agents performed at our institution 2008-2012 and gathered data on age, sex, asthmatic response (immediate/dual/late), smoking status, inhaled corticosteroid usage, and FENO pre- and 24-h postcontrol and positive SIC from each worker. Changes in FENO after positive SICs were compared with control SICs from each worker, by using paired Student's t tests., Results: In 16 workers, negative control challenges were associated with mean changes in FENO of 9 % (95 % CI -1.14 to 19.01) or 1.1 ppb (95 % CI -3.59 to 5.84); 2 of 16 (13 %) workers tested showed increases in FENO that were clinically relevant based on recent guidelines. Subsequent positive SICs were associated with mean changes in FENO of 7 % (95 % CI −15.73 to 29.6) or 2.1 ppb (95 % CI -6.07 to 10.19), which were not significantly different to controls; only 2 of 16 (13 %) workers had FENO changes that were clinically relevant., Conclusions: FENO changes above the upper confidence limits of ≥20 % or ≥6 ppb may be considered to be outside the range of normality. However, the majority of workers who had clearly positive SICs to common low molecular weight agents also had no statistically or clinically relevant increase in FENO. Therefore, change in FENO does not predict a positive SIC in this group.

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: Occupational asthma (OA) remains common; 1 in 10 cases of adult-onset asthma is due to work. Health outcomes are better with early diagnosis, but there is considerable delay, largely due to lack of enquiry about work effect in primary care. National guidelines (2008) recommend asking two screening questions, which together have a high sensitivity in identifying OA., Aims: To audit how working-age asthmatics are currently screened for OA in a local primary care population., Methods: An audit of the electronic patient records of working-age asthmatics, from four Birmingham primary care practices was undertaken. Practice-level data (list size, gender, prevalence of asthma and OA and socio-economic status) and patient-level data (gender, age, onset, occupation and work-effect enquiry and lung function) were collected., Results: The total practice population was 27,295 of which 17,564 (64%) were of working age. The audit sample was 396 of whom 49% were male. The prevalence of asthma in working-age adults was 12% (8-15%) and the prevalence of OA in working-age asthmatics was 0.3% (0-0.8%). Occupation was recorded in only 55/396 (14%) cases with very few (2) documented within the asthma-review template. Occupation was only recorded in 13/55 adult-onset asthmatics in high-risk occupations. Of 396, 9 (2%) had any work-effect enquiry and 4 patients had work-effect enquiry at diagnosis in those with traceable notes (n = 117)., Conclusions: The prevalence of OA was low, suggesting under-diagnosis plus under-reporting in primary care. Occupation and work-effect enquiry is lacking despite guidelines for identifying OA. Existing electronic templates for recording asthma review could be modified to include these elements.