Occupational Asthma Reference

Moual NL, Zock J, Dumas O, Lytras T, Andersson E, Lillienberg L, Schlünssen V, Benke G, Kromhout H, Update of an occupational asthma-specific job exposure matrix to assess exposure to 30 specific agents, Occup Environ Med, 2018;75:507-514,http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2017-104866
(Plain text: Moual NL, Zock J, Dumas O, Lytras T, Andersson E, Lillienberg L, Schlunssen V, Benke G, Kromhout H, Update of an occupational asthma-specific job exposure matrix to assess exposure to 30 specific agents, Occup Environ Med)

Keywords: JEM, occupational asthma, europe,

Known Authors

Jan-Paul Zock, Municipal Institute of Medical Research, Barcelona, Spain Jan-Paul Zock

Vivi Schlunssen, Aarhus Vivi Schlunssen

Eva Andersson, Eva Andersson

Orianne Dumas, Villejuif, France Orianne Dumas

If you would like to become a known author and have your picture displayed along with your papers then please get in touch from the contact page. Known authors can choose to receive emails when their papers receive comments.

Abstract

Objectives
We aimed to update an asthmagen job exposure matrix (JEM) developed in the late 1990s. Main reasons were: the number of suspected and recognised asthmagens has since tripled; understanding of the aetiological role of irritants in asthma and methodological insights in application of JEMs have emerged in the period.

Methods
For each agent of the new occupational asthma-specific JEM (OAsJEM), a working group of three experts out of eight evaluated exposure for each International Standard Classification of Occupations, 1988 (ISCO-88) job code into three categories: ‘high’ (high probability of exposure and moderate-to-high intensity), ‘medium’ (low-to-moderate probability or low intensity) and ‘unexposed’. Within a working group, experts evaluated exposures independently from each other. If expert assessments were inconsistent the final decision was taken by consensus. Specificity was favoured over sensitivity, that is, jobs were classified with high exposure only if the probability of exposure was high and the intensity moderate-to-high. In the final review, all experts checked assigned exposures and proposed/improved recommendations for expert re-evaluation after default application of the JEM.

Results
The OAsJEM covers exposures to 30 sensitisers/irritants, including 12 newly recognised, classified into seven broad groups. Initial agreement between the three experts was mostly fair to moderate (k values 0.2–0.5). Out of 506 ISCO-88 codes, the majority was classified as unexposed (from 82.6% (organic solvents) to 99.8% (persulfates)) and a minority as ‘high-exposed’ (0.2% (persulfates) to 2.6% (organic solvents)).

Conclusions
The OAsJEM developed to improve occupational exposure assessment may improve evaluations of associations with asthma in epidemiological studies and contribute to assessment of the burden of work-related asthma.



Plain text: Objectives We aimed to update an asthmagen job exposure matrix (JEM) developed in the late 1990s. Main reasons were: the number of suspected and recognised asthmagens has since tripled; understanding of the aetiological role of irritants in asthma and methodological insights in application of JEMs have emerged in the period. Methods For each agent of the new occupational asthma-specific JEM (OAsJEM), a working group of three experts out of eight evaluated exposure for each International Standard Classification of Occupations, 1988 (ISCO-88) job code into three categories: 'high' (high probability of exposure and moderate-to-high intensity), 'medium' (low-to-moderate probability or low intensity) and 'unexposed'. Within a working group, experts evaluated exposures independently from each other. If expert assessments were inconsistent the final decision was taken by consensus. Specificity was favoured over sensitivity, that is, jobs were classified with high exposure only if the probability of exposure was high and the intensity moderate-to-high. In the final review, all experts checked assigned exposures and proposed/improved recommendations for expert re-evaluation after default application of the JEM. Results The OAsJEM covers exposures to 30 sensitisers/irritants, including 12 newly recognised, classified into seven broad groups. Initial agreement between the three experts was mostly fair to moderate (k values 0.2-0.5). Out of 506 ISCO-88 codes, the majority was classified as unexposed (from 82.6% (organic solvents) to 99.8% (persulfates)) and a minority as 'high-exposed' (0.2% (persulfates) to 2.6% (organic solvents)). Conclusions The OAsJEM developed to improve occupational exposure assessment may improve evaluations of associations with asthma in epidemiological studies and contribute to assessment of the burden of work-related asthma.

Full Text

Full text of this reference not available

Please Log In or Register to add the full text to this reference

Associated Questions

There are no associations for this paper.

Please Log In or Register to put forward this reference as evidence to a question.

Comments

Please sign in or register to add your thoughts.


Oasys and occupational asthma smoke logo