Workplace inhalational hazards remain common worldwide, even though they are ameliorable. Previous American Thoracic Society documents have assessed the contribution of workplace exposures to asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease on a population level, but not to other chronic respiratory diseases. The goal of this document is to report an in-depth literature review and data synthesis of the occupational contribution to the burden of the major nonmalignant respiratory diseases, including airway diseases; interstitial fibrosis; hypersensitivity pneumonitis; other noninfectious granulomatous lung diseases, including sarcoidosis; and selected respiratory infections. Methods: Relevant literature was identified for each respiratory condition. The occupational population attributable fraction (PAF) was estimated for those conditions for which there were sufficient population-based studies to allow pooled estimates. For the other conditions, the occupational burden of disease was estimated on the basis of attribution in case series, incidence rate ratios, or attributable fraction within an exposed group. Results: Workplace exposures contribute substantially to the burden of multiple chronic respiratory diseases, including asthma (PAF, 16%); chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (PAF, 14%); chronic bronchitis (PAF, 13%); idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (PAF, 26%); hypersensitivity pneumonitis (occupational burden, 19%); other granulomatous diseases, including sarcoidosis (occupational burden, 30%); pulmonary alveolar proteinosis (occupational burden, 29%); tuberculosis (occupational burden, 2.3% in silica-exposed workers and 1% in healthcare workers); and community-acquired pneumonia in working-age adults (PAF, 10%). Conclusions: Workplace exposures contribute to the burden of disease across a range of nonmalignant lung conditions in adults (in addition to the 100% burden for the classic occupational pneumoconioses). This burden has important clinical, research, and policy implications. There is a pressing need to improve clinical recognition and public health awareness of the contribution of occupational factors across a range of nonmalignant respiratory diseases.

AimsTo review cytisine's history of use, pre‐clinical evidence, clinical pharmacokinetics, efficacy, adverse reactions (ARs) and safety for smoking cessation.MethodsA synoptic review of the use of cytisine as a smoking cessation medication, mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics and safety. Relevant literature on data included in these sections were identified through a search of 11 databases with additional literature obtained from reports and monographs. Three databases (PubMed, EMBASE and www.elibrary.ru) were systematically searched for studies published from 2012 to August 2018 in any language to provide an updated meta‐analysis of cytisine's efficacy and ARs for smoking cessation compared with placebo. We pooled the relative risks (RR) of abstinence in the efficacy analysis and RR of ARs, either reported by the authors or calculated from the reports.ResultsCytisine has been in use since 1964 and is currently marketed in 18 countries. Systemic bioavailability from oral ingestion is high and clearance is primarily renal, with minimal or no metabolism. Brain uptake in animal models is moderate. The plasma half‐life averages 4.8 hours. Eight studies were included for meta‐analysis of efficacy. With heterogeneous results, the overall RR versus placebo of successful continuous abstinence at the longest follow‐up was 1.74 [95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.38–2.19]. Nausea, vomiting, dyspepsia, upper abdominal pain and dry mouth that were mild or moderate were the most common ARs, with RR versus placebo 1.10 (95% CI = 0.95–1.28). The cost of cytisine in eastern and central Europe is several‐fold less than that of other smoking cessation medications.ConclusionsCytisine is a low‐cost medication found to increase the likelihood of smoking cessation. The most frequently reported ARs of cytisine involve gastrointestinal symptoms that are mostly reported as either mild or moderate in severity.

This systematic review provides summary estimates of the magnitude of work productivity impairment due to AR and identifies its main determinant factors. This information may help guide both clinicians and health policy makers.

Among many studies on cytisine only a few have been controlled trials, and the aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of cytisine in a randomized controlled double-blind trial compared to placebo in medium-dependent smoking men working in mining industry. Materials and methods: 171 middle-aged smokers were randomised to either cytisine (25-days regimen) or placebo; both groups received individual counseling with brochure. Self-reported continuous abstinence was assessed at 8 and 26 weeks. Results: At the end of week 8 there were no differences in number of abstinent subjects, but at 26 weeks 10.6% of subjects were abstinent in cytisine group compared to 1.2% in placebo (p = .01). In both groups, we did not find any weight increase, but quality of life improved in both groups, and physical and social functioning improved in cytisine group. Conclusions: Cytisine may be an effective medication to help smokers quit even for those working in difficult working conditions with high relapse rate.