Pulmonary function and respiratory symptoms in a population of airport workers.

Abstract

Objectives-To assess the prevalence of respiratory symptoms and to measure spirometry in a sample of employees of Birmingham International Airport, United Kingdom, to examine whether occupational exposure to aircraft fuel or jet stream exhaust might be associated with respiratory symptoms or abnormalities of lung function. Methods-Cross sectional survey by questionnaire and on site measurement of lung function, skin prick tests, and exhaled carbon monoxide concentrations. Occupational exposure was assigned by job title, between group comparison were made by logistic regression analysis. Results-222/680 full time employees were studied (mean age 38.6 y, 63% male, 28% current smokers, 6% self reported asthma, 19% self reported hay fever). Upper and lower respiratory tract symptoms were common and 51% had one or more positive skin tests. There were no significant diVerences in lung function tests between exposure groups. Between group comparisons of respiratory symptoms were restricted to male members of the medium and high exposure groups. The adjusted odds ratio (OR) for cough with phlegm and runny nose were found to be significantly associated with high exposure (OR 3.5, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.23 to 9.74 and 2.9, 1.32 to 6.40 respectively) when the measured confounding eVects of age and smoking, and in the case of runny nose, self reported hay fever had been taken into account. There was no obvious association between high exposure and the presence of shortness of breath or wheeze, or for the symptoms of watering eyes or stuVy nose. Conclusions-These findings support an association in male airport workers, between high occupational exposures to aviation fuel or jet stream exhaust and excess upper and lower respiratory tract symptoms, in keeping with a respiratory irritant. It is more likely that these eVects reflect exposure to exhaust rather than fuel, although the eVects of an unmeasured agent cannot be discounted. (Occup Environ Med 1999;56:118-123)

The airport atmospheric environment: respiratory health at work

“…Airport vicinity exposure Coughing, shortness of breath, wheezing onset and decreased lung function [18] Exacerbation of pre-existing respiratory diseases [4] Airport occupational exposure A runny nose and a cough with phlegm [20] Chest illnesses [21] Exacerbation of pre-existing respiratory diseases [28] Chromium can be deposited in the respiratory tract [29] …”

“…Exhaled carbon monoxide, adjusted for smoking, was similar for all groups. However, these results need to be confirmed by further studies because they were limited by a lack of quantitative data on occupational exposure compared with unexposed workers and the small number of subjects involved [20].…”

“…It was a cross-sectional survey using a questionnaire filled out by the participants themselves. Respiratory and immunological function assessments and an exhaled carbon monoxide measurement were conducted with male full-time airport workers classified into three groups according to their exposure level [20].…”

Residential proximity to large airports and potential health impacts in New York State

“…The conclusion of the authors was that occupational exposure to jet fuel or jet stream exhaust is associated with an excess of some respiratory symptoms. An additional Wnding was that the group's symptoms did not resolve when away from work: the authors speculate that the individuals were still exposed while at home because many lived close to the airport (TunnicliVe et al 1999). Another study looked at residents living ten or more years around one of nine California airports from 1966 to 1986.…”

Análise da fonte e composição da poluição atmosférica em diferentes locais da região metropolitana de São Paulo

“…Este resultado chamou a atenção e foi feita uma pesquisa sobre o que poderia ter influenciado esse aumento. (Ritchie, 2003(Ritchie, , 2004Tunnicliffe, 1999;Carlton, 2000;Kobayashi et al, 2000;Miyamoto 1986 A figura 18 representa a contribuição dos três fatores para os quatro locais amostrados, nota-se que não há diferença significativa na contribuição dos fatores entre as regiões.…”