| 1. |
- Omenaas, Ernst, et al.
(författare)
-
What can we learn about asthma and allergy from the follow-up of the RHINE and the ECRHS studies?
- 2008
-
Ingår i: Clinical Respiratory Journal. - 1752-6981. ; 2:1, s. 45-52
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Object: The international population-based studies RHINE and ECRHS have provided new insight in the epidemiology and management of asthma, allergy and rhinitis in young adults. The aim of the present review is to focus on longitudinal results with regard incidence and net change of asthma and asthma-like symptoms, risk factors and management of asthma, with special reference to the Nordic-Baltic countries. Results: Asthma and rhinitis are common conditions that are important in a public health perspective. There are gender differences in incidence and remission. A socio-economic gradient that non-atopic asthma is more strongly related to poverty seems to have developed in the last decade. These findings will challenge our welfare states in the future. In addition, occupational, as well as indoor and outdoor environmental exposures, influenced the onset of asthma. The population-attributable risk for adult asthma because of occupational exposures is equivalent to an incidence of new-onset asthma of 250–300 cases per million per year. Genetic factors, allergic sensitisation, gastro-oesophageal reflux, habitual snoring, diet and other factors may also contribute to the onset of asthma and rhinitis. Even though management of asthma has improved, there are still great variations throughout Europe. These findings highlight the key role doctors and nurses play in educating and reviewing management of patients.
|
|
| 2. |
- Peters, Susan, et al.
(författare)
-
Narrative review of occupational exposures and noncommunicable diseases
- 2024
-
Ingår i: ANNALS OF WORK EXPOSURES AND HEALTH. - 2398-7308 .- 2398-7316. ; 68:6, s. 562-580
-
Forskningsöversikt (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective Within the scope of the Exposome Project for Health and Occupational Research on applying the exposome concept to working life health, we aimed to provide a broad overview of the status of knowledge on occupational exposures and associated health effects across multiple noncommunicable diseases (NCDs) to help inform research priorities.Methods We conducted a narrative review of occupational risk factors that can be considered to have "consistent evidence for an association," or where there is "limited/inadequate evidence for an association" for 6 NCD groups: nonmalignant respiratory diseases; neurodegenerative diseases; cardiovascular/metabolic diseases; mental disorders; musculoskeletal diseases; and cancer. The assessment was done in expert sessions, primarily based on systematic reviews, supplemented with narrative reviews, reports, and original studies. Subsequently, knowledge gaps were identified, e.g. based on missing information on exposure-response relationships, gender differences, critical time-windows, interactions, and inadequate study quality.Results We identified over 200 occupational exposures with consistent or limited/inadequate evidence for associations with one or more of 60+ NCDs. Various exposures were identified as possible risk factors for multiple outcomes. Examples are diesel engine exhaust and cadmium, with consistent evidence for lung cancer, but limited/inadequate evidence for other cancer sites, respiratory, neurodegenerative, and cardiovascular diseases. Other examples are physically heavy work, shift work, and decision latitude/job control. For associations with limited/inadequate evidence, new studies are needed to confirm the association. For risk factors with consistent evidence, improvements in study design, exposure assessment, and case definition could lead to a better understanding of the association and help inform health-based threshold levels.Conclusions By providing an overview of knowledge gaps in the associations between occupational exposures and their health effects, our narrative review will help setting priorities in occupational health research. Future epidemiological studies should prioritize to include large sample sizes, assess exposures prior to disease onset, and quantify exposures. Potential sources of biases and confounding need to be identified and accounted for in both original studies and systematic reviews.
|
|
