Glutaraldehyde: an occupational hazard in the hospital setting
Background: We report a series of 24 health‐care workers with respiratory symptoms suggestive of occupational asthma due to glutaraldehyde exposure. Methods: The history of asthmatic symptoms was investigated with peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) monitoring, and in eight of the subjects, the specifi...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Allergy (Copenhagen) 1999-10, Vol.54 (10), p.1105-1109 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1109 |
---|---|
container_issue | 10 |
container_start_page | 1105 |
container_title | Allergy (Copenhagen) |
container_volume | 54 |
creator | Di Stefano, F. Siriruttanapruk, S. McCoach, J. Sherwood Burge, P. |
description | Background: We report a series of 24 health‐care workers with respiratory symptoms suggestive of occupational asthma due to glutaraldehyde exposure.
Methods: The history of asthmatic symptoms was investigated with peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) monitoring, and in eight of the subjects, the specific bronchial provocation test (SBPT) was applied as reference standard for diagnosis of occupational asthma. Levels of glutaraldehyde were monitored in the challenge chamber during the SBPT. Work environmental levels of glutaraldehyde were measured from air samples collected at least once during the PEFR monitoring of endoscopy and theatre nurses. Specific IgE antibodies to glutaraldehyde were measured with a series of glutaraldehyde modified proteins.
Results: In the eight workers who underwent SBPT, the diagnosis of occupational asthma was confirmed by a positive reaction (late and dual reaction in five and in three subjects, respectively). The mean level of glutaraldehyde observed during the challenge tests was 0.075 mg/m3 (range 0.065–0.084 mg/m3). In 13 out of the 16 remaining workers, the serial PEFR monitoring showed a work‐related effect. In three workers, there was no physiological confirmation of occupational asthma. Levels of glutaraldehyde from the air samples collected in the workplace were as follows: personal short‐term samples (mean 0.208 mg/m3; median 0.14 mg/m3; range 0.06–0.84 mg/m3), personal long‐term samples (mean 0.071 mg/m3; median 0.07 mg/m3; range 0.003–0.28 mg/m3). Measurements of specific IgE antibodies to glutaraldehyde‐modified proteins were positive in seven patients (29.1%) according to a cutoff value of 0.88% RAST binding. The presence of atopy to common environmental allergens and smoking was not associated with specific IgE positivity (P>0.05; Fisher's exact test).
Conclusions: Our report indicates the importance of glutaraldehyde as an occupational hazard among exposed health‐care workers. Intervention in the workplace, training of personnel handling this chemical, and accurate health surveillance may reduce the risk of developing occupational asthma due to glutaraldehyde. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1034/j.1398-9995.1999.00239.x |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_17587563</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>17587563</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4909-83cff2d13cea8063361b538f3c5bd0d97933702cd793c186dba1ab99c8ce7dbb3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkE1PwyAYgInR6Kz-BdOD8dYKZW3BGJNl0WnSxIueCQVqWVhboY2bv15qF_XoBd68PO8HDwAhgjGCeH69jhGmJKKUpjHyZwxhgmm8PQCzn4dDMIMIptE8xeQEnDq3hhDmCYXH4MTncUYonIG7lRl6brmRqt5JdRPyJmyFGDre67bhJqz5J7cy1E3Y1yqsW9fp3qed6nvdvJ2Bo4obp873dwBeH-5flo9R8bx6Wi6KSMwppBHBoqoSibBQnMAM4wyVfq0Ki7SUUNKcYpzDREgfCEQyWXLES0oFESqXZYkDcDX17Wz7PijXs412QhnDG9UOjqE8JXnqGweATKCwrXNWVayzesPtjiHIRndszUZFbFTERnfs2x3b-tKL_Yyh3Cj5p3CS5YHLPcCd4KayvBHa_XI0T1L_uQDcTtiHNmr37_lsURQ-wF-1mYot</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>17587563</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Glutaraldehyde: an occupational hazard in the hospital setting</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>Access via Wiley Online Library</source><source>Wiley Online Library (Open Access Collection)</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Di Stefano, F. ; Siriruttanapruk, S. ; McCoach, J. ; Sherwood Burge, P.</creator><creatorcontrib>Di Stefano, F. ; Siriruttanapruk, S. ; McCoach, J. ; Sherwood Burge, P.</creatorcontrib><description>Background: We report a series of 24 health‐care workers with respiratory symptoms suggestive of occupational asthma due to glutaraldehyde exposure.
Methods: The history of asthmatic symptoms was investigated with peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) monitoring, and in eight of the subjects, the specific bronchial provocation test (SBPT) was applied as reference standard for diagnosis of occupational asthma. Levels of glutaraldehyde were monitored in the challenge chamber during the SBPT. Work environmental levels of glutaraldehyde were measured from air samples collected at least once during the PEFR monitoring of endoscopy and theatre nurses. Specific IgE antibodies to glutaraldehyde were measured with a series of glutaraldehyde modified proteins.
Results: In the eight workers who underwent SBPT, the diagnosis of occupational asthma was confirmed by a positive reaction (late and dual reaction in five and in three subjects, respectively). The mean level of glutaraldehyde observed during the challenge tests was 0.075 mg/m3 (range 0.065–0.084 mg/m3). In 13 out of the 16 remaining workers, the serial PEFR monitoring showed a work‐related effect. In three workers, there was no physiological confirmation of occupational asthma. Levels of glutaraldehyde from the air samples collected in the workplace were as follows: personal short‐term samples (mean 0.208 mg/m3; median 0.14 mg/m3; range 0.06–0.84 mg/m3), personal long‐term samples (mean 0.071 mg/m3; median 0.07 mg/m3; range 0.003–0.28 mg/m3). Measurements of specific IgE antibodies to glutaraldehyde‐modified proteins were positive in seven patients (29.1%) according to a cutoff value of 0.88% RAST binding. The presence of atopy to common environmental allergens and smoking was not associated with specific IgE positivity (P>0.05; Fisher's exact test).
Conclusions: Our report indicates the importance of glutaraldehyde as an occupational hazard among exposed health‐care workers. Intervention in the workplace, training of personnel handling this chemical, and accurate health surveillance may reduce the risk of developing occupational asthma due to glutaraldehyde.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0105-4538</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1398-9995</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1034/j.1398-9995.1999.00239.x</identifier><identifier>PMID: 10536890</identifier><identifier>CODEN: LLRGDY</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Copenhagen: Munksgaard International Publishers</publisher><subject>Adult ; Air Pollutants, Occupational - adverse effects ; Antibodies, Anti-Idiotypic - immunology ; Antibody Specificity ; Biological and medical sciences ; Bronchial Provocation Tests ; Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma ; False Positive Reactions ; Female ; Glutaral - adverse effects ; Glutaral - immunology ; glutaraldehyde ; Humans ; Male ; Medical sciences ; Middle Aged ; occupational asthma ; Occupational Diseases - chemically induced ; Occupational Exposure - adverse effects ; Peak Expiratory Flow Rate ; Personnel, Hospital ; Pneumology ; Radioallergosorbent Test ; surveillance</subject><ispartof>Allergy (Copenhagen), 1999-10, Vol.54 (10), p.1105-1109</ispartof><rights>1999 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4909-83cff2d13cea8063361b538f3c5bd0d97933702cd793c186dba1ab99c8ce7dbb3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4909-83cff2d13cea8063361b538f3c5bd0d97933702cd793c186dba1ab99c8ce7dbb3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1034%2Fj.1398-9995.1999.00239.x$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1034%2Fj.1398-9995.1999.00239.x$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,1418,1434,27929,27930,45579,45580,46414,46838</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=1972506$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10536890$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Di Stefano, F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Siriruttanapruk, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McCoach, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sherwood Burge, P.</creatorcontrib><title>Glutaraldehyde: an occupational hazard in the hospital setting</title><title>Allergy (Copenhagen)</title><addtitle>Allergy</addtitle><description>Background: We report a series of 24 health‐care workers with respiratory symptoms suggestive of occupational asthma due to glutaraldehyde exposure.
Methods: The history of asthmatic symptoms was investigated with peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) monitoring, and in eight of the subjects, the specific bronchial provocation test (SBPT) was applied as reference standard for diagnosis of occupational asthma. Levels of glutaraldehyde were monitored in the challenge chamber during the SBPT. Work environmental levels of glutaraldehyde were measured from air samples collected at least once during the PEFR monitoring of endoscopy and theatre nurses. Specific IgE antibodies to glutaraldehyde were measured with a series of glutaraldehyde modified proteins.
Results: In the eight workers who underwent SBPT, the diagnosis of occupational asthma was confirmed by a positive reaction (late and dual reaction in five and in three subjects, respectively). The mean level of glutaraldehyde observed during the challenge tests was 0.075 mg/m3 (range 0.065–0.084 mg/m3). In 13 out of the 16 remaining workers, the serial PEFR monitoring showed a work‐related effect. In three workers, there was no physiological confirmation of occupational asthma. Levels of glutaraldehyde from the air samples collected in the workplace were as follows: personal short‐term samples (mean 0.208 mg/m3; median 0.14 mg/m3; range 0.06–0.84 mg/m3), personal long‐term samples (mean 0.071 mg/m3; median 0.07 mg/m3; range 0.003–0.28 mg/m3). Measurements of specific IgE antibodies to glutaraldehyde‐modified proteins were positive in seven patients (29.1%) according to a cutoff value of 0.88% RAST binding. The presence of atopy to common environmental allergens and smoking was not associated with specific IgE positivity (P>0.05; Fisher's exact test).
Conclusions: Our report indicates the importance of glutaraldehyde as an occupational hazard among exposed health‐care workers. Intervention in the workplace, training of personnel handling this chemical, and accurate health surveillance may reduce the risk of developing occupational asthma due to glutaraldehyde.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Air Pollutants, Occupational - adverse effects</subject><subject>Antibodies, Anti-Idiotypic - immunology</subject><subject>Antibody Specificity</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Bronchial Provocation Tests</subject><subject>Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma</subject><subject>False Positive Reactions</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Glutaral - adverse effects</subject><subject>Glutaral - immunology</subject><subject>glutaraldehyde</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>occupational asthma</subject><subject>Occupational Diseases - chemically induced</subject><subject>Occupational Exposure - adverse effects</subject><subject>Peak Expiratory Flow Rate</subject><subject>Personnel, Hospital</subject><subject>Pneumology</subject><subject>Radioallergosorbent Test</subject><subject>surveillance</subject><issn>0105-4538</issn><issn>1398-9995</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1999</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqNkE1PwyAYgInR6Kz-BdOD8dYKZW3BGJNl0WnSxIueCQVqWVhboY2bv15qF_XoBd68PO8HDwAhgjGCeH69jhGmJKKUpjHyZwxhgmm8PQCzn4dDMIMIptE8xeQEnDq3hhDmCYXH4MTncUYonIG7lRl6brmRqt5JdRPyJmyFGDre67bhJqz5J7cy1E3Y1yqsW9fp3qed6nvdvJ2Bo4obp873dwBeH-5flo9R8bx6Wi6KSMwppBHBoqoSibBQnMAM4wyVfq0Ki7SUUNKcYpzDREgfCEQyWXLES0oFESqXZYkDcDX17Wz7PijXs412QhnDG9UOjqE8JXnqGweATKCwrXNWVayzesPtjiHIRndszUZFbFTERnfs2x3b-tKL_Yyh3Cj5p3CS5YHLPcCd4KayvBHa_XI0T1L_uQDcTtiHNmr37_lsURQ-wF-1mYot</recordid><startdate>199910</startdate><enddate>199910</enddate><creator>Di Stefano, F.</creator><creator>Siriruttanapruk, S.</creator><creator>McCoach, J.</creator><creator>Sherwood Burge, P.</creator><general>Munksgaard International Publishers</general><general>Blackwell</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7T2</scope><scope>7T5</scope><scope>7TV</scope><scope>7U2</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>H94</scope></search><sort><creationdate>199910</creationdate><title>Glutaraldehyde: an occupational hazard in the hospital setting</title><author>Di Stefano, F. ; Siriruttanapruk, S. ; McCoach, J. ; Sherwood Burge, P.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4909-83cff2d13cea8063361b538f3c5bd0d97933702cd793c186dba1ab99c8ce7dbb3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1999</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Air Pollutants, Occupational - adverse effects</topic><topic>Antibodies, Anti-Idiotypic - immunology</topic><topic>Antibody Specificity</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Bronchial Provocation Tests</topic><topic>Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma</topic><topic>False Positive Reactions</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Glutaral - adverse effects</topic><topic>Glutaral - immunology</topic><topic>glutaraldehyde</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>occupational asthma</topic><topic>Occupational Diseases - chemically induced</topic><topic>Occupational Exposure - adverse effects</topic><topic>Peak Expiratory Flow Rate</topic><topic>Personnel, Hospital</topic><topic>Pneumology</topic><topic>Radioallergosorbent Test</topic><topic>surveillance</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Di Stefano, F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Siriruttanapruk, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McCoach, J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sherwood Burge, P.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Health and Safety Science Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>Pollution Abstracts</collection><collection>Safety Science and Risk</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Allergy (Copenhagen)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Di Stefano, F.</au><au>Siriruttanapruk, S.</au><au>McCoach, J.</au><au>Sherwood Burge, P.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Glutaraldehyde: an occupational hazard in the hospital setting</atitle><jtitle>Allergy (Copenhagen)</jtitle><addtitle>Allergy</addtitle><date>1999-10</date><risdate>1999</risdate><volume>54</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>1105</spage><epage>1109</epage><pages>1105-1109</pages><issn>0105-4538</issn><eissn>1398-9995</eissn><coden>LLRGDY</coden><abstract>Background: We report a series of 24 health‐care workers with respiratory symptoms suggestive of occupational asthma due to glutaraldehyde exposure.
Methods: The history of asthmatic symptoms was investigated with peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR) monitoring, and in eight of the subjects, the specific bronchial provocation test (SBPT) was applied as reference standard for diagnosis of occupational asthma. Levels of glutaraldehyde were monitored in the challenge chamber during the SBPT. Work environmental levels of glutaraldehyde were measured from air samples collected at least once during the PEFR monitoring of endoscopy and theatre nurses. Specific IgE antibodies to glutaraldehyde were measured with a series of glutaraldehyde modified proteins.
Results: In the eight workers who underwent SBPT, the diagnosis of occupational asthma was confirmed by a positive reaction (late and dual reaction in five and in three subjects, respectively). The mean level of glutaraldehyde observed during the challenge tests was 0.075 mg/m3 (range 0.065–0.084 mg/m3). In 13 out of the 16 remaining workers, the serial PEFR monitoring showed a work‐related effect. In three workers, there was no physiological confirmation of occupational asthma. Levels of glutaraldehyde from the air samples collected in the workplace were as follows: personal short‐term samples (mean 0.208 mg/m3; median 0.14 mg/m3; range 0.06–0.84 mg/m3), personal long‐term samples (mean 0.071 mg/m3; median 0.07 mg/m3; range 0.003–0.28 mg/m3). Measurements of specific IgE antibodies to glutaraldehyde‐modified proteins were positive in seven patients (29.1%) according to a cutoff value of 0.88% RAST binding. The presence of atopy to common environmental allergens and smoking was not associated with specific IgE positivity (P>0.05; Fisher's exact test).
Conclusions: Our report indicates the importance of glutaraldehyde as an occupational hazard among exposed health‐care workers. Intervention in the workplace, training of personnel handling this chemical, and accurate health surveillance may reduce the risk of developing occupational asthma due to glutaraldehyde.</abstract><cop>Copenhagen</cop><pub>Munksgaard International Publishers</pub><pmid>10536890</pmid><doi>10.1034/j.1398-9995.1999.00239.x</doi><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0105-4538 |
ispartof | Allergy (Copenhagen), 1999-10, Vol.54 (10), p.1105-1109 |
issn | 0105-4538 1398-9995 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_17587563 |
source | MEDLINE; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; Access via Wiley Online Library; Wiley Online Library (Open Access Collection); Alma/SFX Local Collection |
subjects | Adult Air Pollutants, Occupational - adverse effects Antibodies, Anti-Idiotypic - immunology Antibody Specificity Biological and medical sciences Bronchial Provocation Tests Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma False Positive Reactions Female Glutaral - adverse effects Glutaral - immunology glutaraldehyde Humans Male Medical sciences Middle Aged occupational asthma Occupational Diseases - chemically induced Occupational Exposure - adverse effects Peak Expiratory Flow Rate Personnel, Hospital Pneumology Radioallergosorbent Test surveillance |
title | Glutaraldehyde: an occupational hazard in the hospital setting |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-13T03%3A09%3A29IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Glutaraldehyde:%20an%20occupational%20hazard%20in%20the%20hospital%20setting&rft.jtitle=Allergy%20(Copenhagen)&rft.au=Di%20Stefano,%20F.&rft.date=1999-10&rft.volume=54&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=1105&rft.epage=1109&rft.pages=1105-1109&rft.issn=0105-4538&rft.eissn=1398-9995&rft.coden=LLRGDY&rft_id=info:doi/10.1034/j.1398-9995.1999.00239.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E17587563%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=17587563&rft_id=info:pmid/10536890&rfr_iscdi=true |