BACKGROUND: Swine farmers are exposed to a number of airborne contaminants associated with respiratory ill health. OBJECTIVES: To examine the factors associated with healthy worker effect in the swine industry from a longitudinal follow-up of farmers at 4 years and 13 years. DESIGN: A prospective study of swine farmers and nonexposed rural residents was conducted using similar questionnaires and same spirometer at each time point. RESULTS: In the original observations in 1990/1991, we studied 302 swine farmers and 261 nonfarming control subjects. Four years later in 1994/1995, 217 swine farmers and 171 nonfarming control subjects of the original group participated again. In 2003/2004, 163 swine farmers and 118 control subjects were retested. Of the 163 swine farmers, 52 remained active swine farmers and 111 were no longer swine farming, thus providing the opportunity to evaluate work continuity in the industry. Among farmers studied in 2003/2004, mean values for percentage of predicted FEV(1)/FVC ratio and forced expiratory flow between 25% and 75% of FVC were lower in those who had quit swine farming compared to those still swine farming and nonfarming control subjects. The herd size in the barn at baseline in 1990/1991 and at interim follow-up in 1994/1995 was a significant predictor of quitting swine farming. In addition, percentage of predicted FEV(1)/FVC at the interim observation was a significant predictor of quitting swine farming. CONCLUSIONS: There is a significant healthy worker effect among swine farmers. The continuation of work in the facilities may be predicted by herd size and interim lung function.
BACKGROUND:Swine farmers are exposed to a number of airborne contaminants associated with respiratory ill health. OBJECTIVES: To examine the factors associated with healthy worker effect in the swine industry from a longitudinal follow-up of farmers at 4 years and 13 years. DESIGN: A prospective study of swine farmers and nonexposed rural residents was conducted using similar questionnaires and same spirometer at each time point. RESULTS: In the original observations in 1990/1991, we studied 302 swine farmers and 261 nonfarming control subjects. Four years later in 1994/1995, 217 swine farmers and 171 nonfarming control subjects of the original group participated again. In 2003/2004, 163 swine farmers and 118 control subjects were retested. Of the 163 swine farmers, 52 remained active swine farmers and 111 were no longer swine farming, thus providing the opportunity to evaluate work continuity in the industry. Among farmers studied in 2003/2004, mean values for percentage of predicted FEV(1)/FVC ratio and forced expiratory flow between 25% and 75% of FVC were lower in those who had quit swine farming compared to those still swine farming and nonfarming control subjects. The herd size in the barn at baseline in 1990/1991 and at interim follow-up in 1994/1995 was a significant predictor of quitting swine farming. In addition, percentage of predicted FEV(1)/FVC at the interim observation was a significant predictor of quitting swine farming. CONCLUSIONS: There is a significant healthy worker effect among swine farmers. The continuation of work in the facilities may be predicted by herd size and interim lung function.
Authors: Jessica L Rinsky; David B Richardson; Kathleen Kreiss; Leena Nylander-French; Laura E Beane Freeman; Stephanie J London; Paul K Henneberger; Jane A Hoppin Journal: Environ Int Date: 2019-04-25 Impact factor: 9.621
Authors: Albert Rosenberger; Heike Bickeböller; Valerie McCormack; Darren R Brenner; Eric J Duell; Anne Tjønneland; Soren Friis; Joshua E Muscat; Ping Yang; H-Erich Wichmann; Joachim Heinrich; Neonila Szeszenia-Dabrowska; Jolanta Lissowska; David Zaridze; Peter Rudnai; Eleonora Fabianova; Vladimir Janout; Vladimir Bencko; Paul Brennan; Dana Mates; Ann G Schwartz; Michele L Cote; Zuo-Feng Zhang; Hal Morgenstern; Sam S Oh; John K Field; Olaide Raji; John R McLaughlin; John Wiencke; Loic LeMarchand; Monica Neri; Stefano Bonassi; Angeline S Andrew; Qing Lan; Wei Hu; Irene Orlow; Bernard J Park; Paolo Boffetta; Rayjean J Hung Journal: Carcinogenesis Date: 2011-12-22 Impact factor: 4.944
Authors: Jing Shi; Amar J Mehta; Jing-Qing Hang; Hongxi Zhang; Helian Dai; Li Su; Ellen A Eisen; David C Christiani Journal: Environ Health Perspect Date: 2010-11 Impact factor: 9.031
Authors: Punam Pahwa; Sylvia Abonyi; Chandima Karunanayake; Donna C Rennie; Bonnie Janzen; Shelley Kirychuk; Joshua A Lawson; Tarun Katapally; Kathleen McMullin; Jeremy Seeseequasis; Arnold Naytowhow; Louise Hagel; Roland F Dyck; Mark Fenton; Ambikaipakan Senthilselvan; Vivian Ramsden; Malcolm King; Niels Koehncke; Greg Marchildon; Lesley McBain; Thomas Smith-Windsor; Janet Smylie; Jo-Ann Episkenew; James A Dosman Journal: BMC Res Notes Date: 2015-05-16
Authors: E A J Spierenburg; L A M Smit; D Heederik; P Robbe; M N Hylkema; I M Wouters Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2015-03-21 Impact factor: 3.015
Authors: Punam Pahwa; Chandima P Karunanayake; Louise Hagel; Bonnie Janzen; William Pickett; Donna Rennie; Ambikaipakan Senthilselvan; Josh Lawson; Shelley Kirychuk; James Dosman Journal: BMC Res Notes Date: 2012-08-01