Literature DB >> 18515847

Variability in endotoxin exposure levels and consequences for exposure assessment.

Suzanne Spaan1, Jody Schinkel, Inge M Wouters, Liesbeth Preller, Erik Tielemans, Evelyn Tjoe Nij, Dick Heederik.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Workers in many industries are exposed to endotoxins, which may cause adverse health effects. In exposure assessment, information about exposure variability is essential. However, variability in exposure has rarely been investigated for biological agents and more specifically for endotoxin. Therefore, variance components and determinants of exposure were studied in a large database with >2000 endotoxin measurements.
METHODS: Data from 10 individual studies were combined to create a database with 2010 personal inhalable dust and endotoxin measurements, of which 1650 were repeated measurements. Exposure groups were defined based on job codes. Between- and within-worker variance components were estimated for different grouping strategies, and determinants of exposure were studied using mixed effects models.
RESULTS: Inhalable dust and endotoxin exposure levels are summarized for 46 industries and 4 broadly defined sectors. The between-worker variability exceeded the within-worker variability overall and within sectors and subsectors, and variance components were larger for endotoxin than for dust. Between-worker variability also exceeded within-worker variability in nearly half of the exposure groups based upon industries or job code within industries for endotoxin exposure and in 10% of the groups for dust exposure. Among other things, dustiness of the process, contact with animals, bulk production, presence of plant material or a cyclic process appeared as determinants of exposure, which largely explained the between-worker variability.
CONCLUSIONS: Exposure groups were much less homogeneous for endotoxin exposure than for dust exposure. This is distinctly different than for chemical exposure. Large variability in measured exposure levels is inherent to endotoxin exposure, which is caused in part by determinants that influence growth of microorganisms. These findings have major consequences for the design of future occupational intervention and epidemiological studies. The measurement effort needs to be greater than exposure assessment for chemical agents which demonstrate lower exposure variability, especially when evaluating endotoxin exposure for compliance testing. The established determinants of exposure give direction for potential exposure control, although more information about determinants of day-to-day variability in exposure is still needed to be able to effectively control endotoxin exposure.

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18515847     DOI: 10.1093/annhyg/men024

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Occup Hyg        ISSN: 0003-4878


  12 in total

1.  Bioaerosol exposure assessment in the workplace: the past, present and recent advances.

Authors:  Wijnand Eduard; Dick Heederik; Caroline Duchaine; Brett James Green
Journal:  J Environ Monit       Date:  2012-01-23

Review 2.  A comprehensive review of levels and determinants of personal exposure to dust and endotoxin in livestock farming.

Authors:  Ioannis Basinas; Torben Sigsgaard; Hans Kromhout; Dick Heederik; Inge M Wouters; Vivi Schlünssen
Journal:  J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol       Date:  2013-11-27       Impact factor: 5.563

3.  Field Studies Measuring the Aerosolization of Endotoxin During the Land Application of Class B Biosolids.

Authors:  R F Herrmann; R J Grosser; D Farrar; R B Brobst
Journal:  Aerobiologia (Bologna)       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 2.410

Review 4.  Endotoxin exposure and lung cancer risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the published literature on agriculture and cotton textile workers.

Authors:  Virissa Lenters; Ioannis Basinas; Laura Beane-Freeman; Paolo Boffetta; Harvey Checkoway; David Coggon; Lützen Portengen; Malcolm Sim; Inge M Wouters; Dick Heederik; Roel Vermeulen
Journal:  Cancer Causes Control       Date:  2009-12-12       Impact factor: 2.506

5.  Temporal and spatial patterns of ambient endotoxin concentrations in Fresno, California.

Authors:  Ira B Tager; Frederick W Lurmann; Thaddeus Haight; Siana Alcorn; Bryan Penfold; S Katharine Hammond
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2010-05-21       Impact factor: 9.031

6.  Mouse lung inflammation after instillation of particulate matter collected from a working dairy barn.

Authors:  Teresa C Wegesser; Jerold A Last
Journal:  Toxicol Appl Pharmacol       Date:  2009-03-09       Impact factor: 4.219

7.  Personal exposure to dust and endotoxin in Robusta and Arabica coffee processing factories in Tanzania.

Authors:  Gloria Sakwari; Simon H D Mamuya; Magne Bråtveit; Lennart Larsson; Christina Pehrson; Bente E Moen
Journal:  Ann Occup Hyg       Date:  2012-10-01

Review 8.  Endotoxin and cancer.

Authors:  Jessica I Lundin; Harvey Checkoway
Journal:  Environ Health Perspect       Date:  2009-05-07       Impact factor: 9.031

9.  Advanced REACH Tool: a Bayesian model for occupational exposure assessment.

Authors:  Kevin McNally; Nicholas Warren; Wouter Fransman; Rinke Klein Entink; Jody Schinkel; Martie van Tongeren; John W Cherrie; Hans Kromhout; Thomas Schneider; Erik Tielemans
Journal:  Ann Occup Hyg       Date:  2014-03-24

10.  Effect of ionization, bedding, and feeding on air quality in a horse stable.

Authors:  Esther Willemijn Siegers; Milou Anthonisse; Frank J C M van Eerdenburg; Jan van den Broek; Inge M Wouters; Cornélie Martine Westermann
Journal:  J Vet Intern Med       Date:  2018-02-27       Impact factor: 3.333

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.