Prevalence of respiratory symptoms and spirometric changes among non-smoker male wood workers
Prevalence of respiratory symptoms and spirometric changes among non-smoker male wood workers
复制标题
非吸烟男性木材工人呼吸道症状和肺活量变化的患病率
DOI：
10.1371/journal.pone.0224860
复制
发表时间：
2020-03-18
期刊：
影响因子：
3.7
通讯作者：
Wang, Tian
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hosseini, Davood K.;Nejad, Vahab Malekshahi;Wang, Tian
目的
评估工作场所接触硬木粉尘对肺功能的影响，并确定木工呼吸症状的患病率。
研究设计
横断面观察性研究。
研究地点
三级转诊中心。
研究对象与方法
本研究纳入了276名不吸烟的男性木工以及同等数量不吸烟的男性办公室职员，他们均被转诊至肺科诊所。对研究参与者的评估包括填写一份关于呼吸症状的问卷，并根据实际建议测量基线肺功能。
结果
木工的呼吸症状，包括咳嗽、咳痰、胸闷和喘息，明显高于办公室职员（咳嗽：40.2%对29.3%，p = 0.0073；咳痰：40.6%对23.6%，p < 0.0001；胸闷：38.0%对23.1%，p = 0.0001；喘息：25.3%对14.5%，p = 0.0014）。木工与办公室职员相比，呼吸困难和上呼吸道症状无统计学显著差异。木工比办公室职员更有可能需要进行肺功能测试（21.4%对5.4%，p < 0.001），且木工在肺功能测试中阻塞性改变更为普遍（阻塞性模式为71.4%，限制性模式为28.6%）。肺功能测试显示，木工的第一秒用力呼气容积（FEV1）和FEV1/用力肺活量（FVC）比值的平均值明显低于对照组的平均值。
结论
与工作相关的呼吸症状在木工中比在办公室职员中更为普遍。我们的数据显示，工作场所接触硬木粉尘可能会损害呼吸功能，这表明在工作场所优化预防措施以保护暴露工人的呼吸健康的重要性和必要性。肺功能测试中的阻塞性改变是木工肺功能测试中的主要病理模式。需要利用现有的工具，如鼻细胞学，进一步研究以检测木尘暴露对上呼吸道的影响。
Objective To assess the effects of workplace exposure to hardwood dust on lung function and determine a prevalence of respiratory symptoms among wood workers. Study design Cross-sectional observational study. Setting Tertiary referral center. Subjects and methods Two hundred seventy-six, non-smoker male wood workers and equal number of non-smoker male office workers, referred to pulmonology clinic included in this study. Evaluation of study participants included completion of a questionnaire regarding respiratory symptoms and baseline spirometry was measured according to the actual recommendations. Results Respiratory symptoms including cough, phlegm, chest tightness, and wheezing were significantly higher in wood workers than office workers (40.2% versus 29.3% for cough, p = 0.0073; 40.6% versus 23.6% for phlegm, p<0.0001; 38.0% versus 23.1% for chest tightness, p = 0.0001; 25.3% versus 14.5% for wheezing, p = 0.0014). No statistically significant differences were observed for Dyspnea, and upper respiratory tract symptoms among wood workers compared to office workers. While wood workers were more likely to require spirometry test than office workers (21.4% versus 5.4%, p<0.001) the obstructive changes were more prevalent on spirometry test in wood workers (71.4% obstructive pattern versus 28.6% restrictive pattern). Spirometry test revealed the mean values of FEV1 and FEV1/FVC ratio were significantly lower in the wood workers, compared to their mean values in the control group. Conclusion Respiratory symptoms associated with work, are more prevalent among wood workers than office workers. Our data revealed that workplace exposure to hardwood dust may compromise respiratory function, indicating the importance and the need for optimizing preventive measures in workplace to protect the respiratory health among exposed workers. Obstructive changes on pulmonary function test is a dominant pathologic pattern in pulmonary function test among wood workers. Further investigation is required by current available tools such as nasal cytology to detect influence of wood dust exposure on the upper respiratory airway.