Dust Exposure and Respiratory Symptoms - Case Study Example

Dust Exposure and Respiratory Dust Exposure and Respiratory Symptoms Background Ahmed & Abdullah work, “Dust Exposure and Respiratory Symptoms among Cement Factory Worker in the United Arab Emirates” (2012) was done by 25 August 2011 and published online 28 February 2012. The importance of the study is that it assesses the exposure among workers in the United Arab Emirates cement factories and links it to the workers health. It is an assessment of how the factory’s workers exposure to dust affects their respiratory system. Purpose Ahmed & Abdullah (2012) plan was to estimate the amount of dust that is in the United Arab Emirates cement factory. They then compared the estimated amount to the limit of exposure. They then used the information to determine the respiratory symptoms occurrence among those that are exposed and compare to those that are not exposed to the dust. The information collected was used by Ahmed & Abdullah (2012) to evaluate the details in relation to the use of necessary equipment for respiratory infection protection. The hypothesis of the study is that; the dust level of the factory is low and the same can be said to the level of exposure among the workers thus there are no prevalence difference among the exposed subjects and the non-exposed ones. The importance of the study was that it helped in the determination of the level of United Arab Emirates cement factories’ workers exposure to dust. The data collected was therefore used to determine if the cement factories in the United Arab Emirates have increased the rate of respiratory infections among the workers. It also looked at the use of the protection gears as the mitigation measure and the effects that it has caused (Ahmed & Abdullah, 2012). Problem Statement Cement manufacturing has several processes that include mining, raw material grinding and crashing, kiln burning and blending for clinker formation, milling of cement and packaging. During this processes, there is an emanation of dust thus making the workers exposed to it. There are several researchers that have linked the occupational exposure that is chronic to the chronic respiratory infections among workers exposed. The signs and symptoms of these infections include sputum, coughing, dyspenia and alteration of the indices of pulmonary functioning. This is contrary to the findings of some of the researchers that most of the respiratory symptoms between most of the unexposed and exposed workers have difference that is not significant (Ahmed & Abdullah, 2012). Methods The hypothesis was tested at one of the United Arab Emirates factories. The selected factory had never been sampled for effects of respiratory health and dust exposure assessment previously. The subjects of the study were 227 factory workers of the male gender that were selected randomly. This made the total number of the population tested. The subjects were divided into two groups: the exposed group and the unexposed group. The exposed group entails 149 workers exposed to dust. These are the workers that are deployed in the areas of crushers, raw mills, packaging areas, kilns and cement mills. The unexposed groups are those subjects that were not dust- exposed. They are those working in the departments of finance and administration among others (Ahmed & Abdullah, 2012). The techniques used include dust assessment, respiratory symptoms, “walk- through survey”, and statistical analysis. The dust assessment entailed measurement of the “personal ‘total’ dust” among the workers that were randomly selected and were from the production area. There was the use of filter membranes of cellulose acetate that are pre- weighted in the collection of the each workers air sample. The type of filter membranes used was type AA, with a micrometer pore size of 0.8 and a diameter of 37mm. The filter membrane was placed filter cassette of 37 mm that is closed and connected to an “SKC AFC 123 pump with a flow rate of 2 l/min”. The time for sampling ranged between 380 min and 420 min. The data collected from the calibrated instruments was used in the calculation of the dust concentration (Ahmed & Abdullah, 2012). The respiratory symptoms study was conducted through a questionnaire that is administered by the interviewer. The questions that were entailed in the questionnaire are work history, demographics, “respiratory personal equipment” use, respiratory symptoms and smoking habits. The questionnaire was based on the British Medical Research Council (BMRC) standards. This was used to classify a worker whether he or she has phlegm, cough, dyspenia, breath shortness, bronchial asthma and chronic bronchitis. There was a development of flowcharts in reference to the kind of infection. For example, Fig. 3 (Ahmed & Abdullah, 2012) below shows the information in relation to bronchial asthma and breath shortness. Having you ever had attacks of shortness of breath with wheezing? Yes Is/ Was your breathing normal during the attacks? Yes No Fig. 3. Flowchart for shortness of breath and bronchial Asthma Fig. 3 is a demonstration of the type of questions in the respiratory symptoms questionnaire. These questions helped in the determination if one has either breath shortness or bronchial asthma in relation to BMRC standards. Breath shortness was realized if the respondent responded positively to have shortness of breath attacks and normally breathing during the attacks. Respondents were classified to have bronchial asthma when they respondent positive that they have breath shortness and negative in relation to breathing normal during the attacks (Ahmed & Abdullah, 2012). Walk- through survey aim was to ensure that the pumps, used to sample dusts, flow rate were checked. There was use of the protection equipment for the case of respiratory infections or not. Statistical analysis of the data collected was done using the software SPSS 14.0. Percentages, frequencies, standard deviation and means were all calculated where there were appropriate variables. Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and t-test (students) were used in the difference evaluation for the case of 2 or more groups. In case of significant results from the use of ANOVA, Holm- Bonferroni method was used to explore the group differences. To ensure that the percentages were compared, there was the use of the x2 test. In addition, logistic regression analysis was also used to determine predictors (important factors) that influence each and every of the respiratory symptoms. The ethics part of the research is that “Research and Ethical Committee of the college of health sciences- University of Sharja” approves it (Ahmed & Abdullah, 2012). Results Practice There were available protection gears for the workers. 79.2 % claimed that they used the gears, 12.8% said they used cloth masks that are ordinary while 8.1% never used any of the masks. Out of 188 workers who used the masks, 24.6% used them throughout while 75. 4% used them partially. Among those who were reported using the mask every time (29), only 25 were found with their masks on. Out of 29 workers who claimed to use their mask every time, 69% said the place of work is so dusty while 31% said the dust is a little or mild dusty. 18 of the 29 workers worked in sections that the dust levels were above standard. Among those exposed 21 workers who claimed to have coughs and 18 that had phlegm rarely or never used masks. Regression analysis showed that the reason for protective gears use was because the environment was dusty (Ahmed & Abdullah, 2012). Table 1: Demographic and characteristics of the study population Variable [Exposed (n= 149)/ n (%)] [Unexposed (n= 78)/ n (%)] p- value Age (yr) 15 2 (1.3) 13 (16.7) Mean (SD) 11.0 (2.5) 12.2 (3.0) 0.002b Years of service 5 years. Indians made majority of the unexposed and exposed subjects. The subjects that were not exposed were more educated than those that are exposed (Ahmed & Abdullah, 2012). Table 2: Personal Total dust concentrations, cumulative total dusts and subject assessment of the dust by area. Levels of Dust In the table 2 above, there was a high dust level in the raw mills and cement packaging areas. About 77 workers of the subjects exposed very dusty, 49 mildly dusty and 23 little dusty (Ahmed & Abdullah, 2012). Respiratory Symptoms Table 3 below shows that the exposed lot higher rate of prevalence of cough compared to the unexposed group. Dyspnea severe forms of were experienced among the job grade 2 workers in comparison to the unexposed workers. Chronic bronchitis and breath shortness was less common among the unexposed group compared to the exposed group. Prevalence rates showed to be higher among the smoking workers in the unexposed group compared to the non smoking ones. The exposed workers seem to have higher levels of wheezing, breath shortness, dyspnea (≥grade II), diagonised asthma and chronic bronchitis compared to the unexposed counterparts (Ahmed and Abdullah, 2012). Table 3: Prevalence of respiratory symptoms in the exposed and unexposed workers According to table 4 below, cumulative exposure to dust increases the prevalence of phlegm, cough, chronic bronchitis, diagnosed asthma and shortness of breath. Te exposed group are more affected by the cumulative dust compared to the unexposed group. In relation to table 5, the habit of smoking could be a cause of chronic bronchitis while dust exposure and smoking can be variables of phlegm and cough (Ahmed & Abdullah, 2012). Table 4: Prevalence rates and odd ratios of the relationship between respiratory symptoms and cumulative dust exposure Table 5: Logistic regression models for the respiratory symptoms Discussion Exposure to cement dust causes respiratory infections (diseases and symptoms). In the cement factories, one can not avoid the exposure to dust but its effects can be mitigated through the use of protective gears. The personal total dust exposure in the cement industry is beyond the recommended level as per the ACGIH (Ahmed & Abdullah, 2012). Limitations Their paper is logical, and the procedures are detailed and to the point. The data in relation to the availability is not comprehensive enough. It just says that the protective gears were available but does not say if they were enough for all the workers or not. This would be seen as its weakness yet the study is good since it makes use of both the primary and secondary data. It strength can also be seen in the fact that it addresses an issue of concern (Ahmed & Abdullah, 2012). Conclusion This paper gives the background of the study done by Ahmed & Abdullah (2012) in relation to “Dust Exposure and Respiratory Symptoms among Cement Factory Workers in the United Arab Emirates”. It tackles the research purpose and the methods that were used to conduct the research. It goes on to look at the results, discussions, implications and limitations of the study. Reference Ahmed, H. O., & Abdullah, A. A. (2012). Dust Exposure and Respiratory Symptoms among Cement Factory Workers in the United Arab Emirates. Industrial Health, 50(3), 214-222. Read More