ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: This study used data from a large UK outbreak investigation, to develop and validate a new case definition for hypersensitivity pneumonitis due to metalworking fluid exposure (MWF-HP). METHODS: The clinical data from all workers with suspected MWF-HP were reviewed by an experienced panel of clinicians. A new MWF-HP Score was then developed to match the "gold standard" clinical opinion as closely as possible, using standard diagnostic criteria that were relatively weighted by their positive predictive value. RESULTS: The new case definition was reproducible, and agreed with expert panel opinion in 30/37 cases. This level of agreement was greater than with any of the three previously utilized case definitions (agreement in 16-24 cases). Where it was possible to calculate, the MWF-HP Score also performed well when applied to 50 unrelated MWF-HP cases. CONCLUSIONS: The MWF-HP Score offers a new case definition for use in future outbreaks.
Subject(s)
Air Pollutants, Occupational/toxicity , Alveolitis, Extrinsic Allergic/diagnosis , Alveolitis, Extrinsic Allergic/etiology , Industrial Oils/toxicity , Metallurgy/methods , Occupational Exposure/adverse effects , Adult , Humans , Lubrication , Male , Middle Aged , Reproducibility of Results , United KingdomABSTRACT
Occupational asthma is common, disabling and costly, and it is often difficult to diagnose. Incidence statistics are consequently unreliable, and there are formidable difficulties in recognizing and managing what should be a preventable illness. The opportunities have largely been missed. The author offers a personal view of what, ideally, should be done--recognizing that at present the ideal is not readily practical. Always consider the possibility of an occupational cause at the time adult-onset asthma is first recognized-the probability of this is of the order 9-15%. Do not prescribe treatment unless this possibility is remote or the asthma is life-threatening. If the possibility is not remote seek immediate advice from a specialized centre, without prescribing masking medication and without curtailing usual work practice. The specialized referral centre should place the accurate measurement of airway responsiveness at the centre of investigatory strategies. A return-to-work study, monitored by serial measurements of airway responsiveness and ventilatory function, provides adequate objective evidence for diagnosis in most cases. When a novel cause is suspected, specific inhalation provocation testing with the particular agent in the specialized centre is desirable. Regular competent surveillance is necessary in high-risk occupational environments; this should include environmental monitoring, the detection of relevant new symptoms, spirometry measurements, serum antibody studies (where available) and a robust protocol for managing inevitable failed attendances.
Subject(s)
Asthma/epidemiology , Bronchial Provocation Tests/methods , Occupational Diseases/epidemiology , Occupational Exposure/prevention & control , Asthma/prevention & control , Asthma/therapy , Humans , Occupational Diseases/prevention & control , Occupational Diseases/therapy , Occupational Exposure/adverse effectsABSTRACT
Regression analyses for the effect of an environmental agent on lung function often give discordant results when derived from cross-sectional compared with longitudinal studies. To evaluate why this occurs, a normal population was created by computer, and modeled to simulate functional change during life. Thus, factors known to influence lung function measurement (including those that may cause COPD) were manipulated experimentally so that their contributions to any discordance could be assessed. Regression analyses showed that significant discordance could be induced if the oldest birth cohort failed to reach the same maximal level of function as the youngest (a "cohort effect"). This distorted the cross-sectional (but not longitudinal) estimate for the dominating effect of age and additionally influenced cross-sectional estimates for the effects of partially collinear variables such as cumulative exposure to hazardous environmental dust. Discordance also occurred if regression coefficients became imprecise through random measurement/reporting error, between-subject variability, and differing susceptibility, but then the differences (sometimes marked) between cross-sectional and longitudinal estimates were not significant. We conclude that modeling a population with known characteristics can provide a useful means of demonstrating that cross-sectional versus longitudinal discordance may be fundamental and unavoidable (though explicable), or merely a consequence of imprecision.
