No abstract

No abstract

RationaleWhile cross-sectional studies have shown associations between certain occupational exposures and lower levels of lung function, there was little evidence from population-based studies with repeated lung function measurements.ObjectivesWe aimed to investigate the associations between occupational exposures and longitudinal lung function decline in the population-based Tasmanian Longitudinal Health Study.MethodsLung function decline between ages 45 years and 50 years was assessed using data from 767 participants. Using lifetime work history calendars completed at age 45 years, exposures were assigned according to the ALOHA plus Job Exposure Matrix. Occupational exposures were defined as ever exposed and cumulative exposure -unit- years. We investigated effect modification by sex, smoking and asthma status.ResultsCompared with those without exposure, ever exposures to aromatic solvents and metals were associated with a greater decline in FEV1 (aromatic solvents 15.5 mL/year (95% CI −24.8 to 6.3); metals 11.3 mL/year (95% CI −21.9 to – 0.7)) and FVC (aromatic solvents 14.1 mL/year 95% CI −28.8 to – 0.7; metals 17.5 mL/year (95% CI –34.3 to – 0.8)). Cumulative exposure (unit years) to aromatic solvents was also associated with greater decline in FEV1 and FVC. Women had lower cumulative exposure years to aromatic solvents than men (mean (SD) 9.6 (15.5) vs 16.6 (14.6)), but greater lung function decline than men. We also found association between ever exposures to gases/fumes or mineral dust and greater decline in lung function.ConclusionsExposures to aromatic solvents and metals were associated with greater lung function decline. The effect of aromatic solvents was strongest in women. Preventive strategies should be implemented to reduce these exposures in the workplace.

Bushfires, prescribed burns and residential wood burning are a significant source of fine particles (PM2.5) affecting the health and well-being of many communities. Despite the lack of evidence, a common public health recommendation is to remain indoors assuming that the home provides a protective barrier against ambient PM2.5. The study aimed to assess to what extent houses provide protection against peak concentrations of outdoor PM2.5 and whether remaining indoors is an effective way of reducing exposure to PM2.5. The effectiveness of this strategy was evaluated by conducting simultaneous week-long indoor and outdoor measurements of PM2.5 at 21 residences in regional areas of Victoria, Australia. During smoke plume events, remaining indoors protected residents from peak outdoor PM2.5 concentrations, but the level of protection was highly variable ranging from 12-76%. Housing stock (e.g. age of the house) and ventilation (e.g. having windows/doors open or closed) played a significant role in the infiltration of outdoor PM2.5 indoors. The results also showed that leaving windows and doors closed once the smoke plume abates trapped PM2.5 indoors and increased indoor exposure to PM2.5. Furthermore, for approximately 50% of households, indoor sources such as cooking activities, smoking and burning candles or incense contributed significantly to indoor PM2.5.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.