Wood dust exposure negatively impacts lung function in carpenters
Key takeaways:
- Assessed lung function measures included FEV1, FVC, FEV1/FVC ratio and peak expiratory flow rate.
- Researchers observed that each lung function measure went down with more years of wood dust exposure.
Between a group of carpenters and an age-, sex- and height-matched group of university employees, carpenters had worse average lung function values, according to results published in BMC Pulmonary Medicine.
“Wood dust’s effects on carpenters’ respiratory systems are worth further discussion,” Noura Mohamed Elfatih, of the department of physiology at The National Ribat University in Sudan, and colleagues wrote. “Awareness campaigns should be undertaken to educate carpenters about lung health and preventative measures.”
In a comparative cross-sectional community-based study, Elfatih and colleagues assessed 65 carpenters (mean age, 51.6 years; mean BMI, 21.9 kg/m2) and 65 university employees (mean age, 49.8 years; mean BMI, 22.6 kg/m2) matched to the carpenters by age, sex and height to uncover how wood dust exposure impacts four lung function measures: FEV1, FVC, FEV1/FVC ratio and peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR).
Notably, the university employees did not have “prior occupational exposure to respiratory dangers,” according to the study.
Within the carpenter group, 30.76% (n = 20) worked for 1 to 10 years, 27.69% (n = 18) worked for 11 to 20 years, 20% (n = 13) worked for 21 to 30 years and the remaining 21.53% (n = 14) worked for more than 30 years.
Researchers found respiratory problems in a little over one-third of the evaluated carpenters (35.4%; n = 23). Most reported sneezing (n = 11) or cough (n = 8) whereas fewer reported shortness of breath (n = 3) or chest pain (n = 1).
When assessing FEV1, matched individuals had a mean value of 3.07 L, whereas carpenters had a mean value of 2.5 L, which the study noted as a significant reduction (P < .001).
Researchers also found a significantly decreased mean FVC in the carpenter group vs. the matched group (2.92 L vs. 3.39 L; P < .001).
This pattern of significantly lower values among carpenters vs. matched individuals continued during the evaluation of mean FEV1/FVC (86% vs. 90.58%; P < .001) and mean PEFR (467.39 L/minute vs. 476.71 L/minute; P < .001), according to the study.
When divided based on years working/years of wood dust exposure, researchers observed that each lung function measure went down with a greater number of years, and the carpenter group had smaller values than the matched group in the years of exposure/work ranges.
Between the carpenters and matched individuals, the carpenters had significantly reduced mean FEV1 when split into 11 to 20 years of exposure (2.52 L vs. 3.15 L; P < .001), 21 to 30 years (2.25 L vs. 2.96 L; P = .002) and more than 30 years (2 L vs. 2.78 L; P < .001).
In the same years of exposures as above, researchers reported significantly decreased mean FVC in carpenters vs. matched individuals: 11 to 20 years (2.88 L vs. 3.47 L; P < .001), 21 to 30 years (2.63 L vs. 3.29 L; P = .003) and more than 30 years (2.41 L vs. 3.11 L; P < .001).
Carpenters with 1 to 10 years of wood dust exposure had a significantly poorer mean FEV1/FVC than matched individuals with 1 to 10 years working (89.2% vs. 91%; P = .031). According to the study, this was also the case when analyzing those with 11 to 20 years of exposure/work (87.5% vs. 91%; P = .004), 21 to 30 years of exposure/work (85.55% vs. 90%; P = .01) and more than 30 years of exposure/work (82.9% vs. 89.38%; P < .001).
Lastly, researchers found significantly lower mean PEFR in carpenters with 11 to 20 years of exposure/work vs. matched individuals with this number of years (476.9 L/minute vs. 485.7 L/minute; P = .005), as well as in carpenters with more than 30 years of exposure/work vs. matched individuals with this number of years (426.1 L/minute vs. 444.6 L/minute; P < .001).
In terms of correlation, the study highlighted that wood dust exposure length was significantly (P < .001) correlated to three lung function measures: FEV1, FVC and PEFR.
“To reduce the detrimental effects of wood dust on carpenter respiratory health, we recommended that individuals receive preemployment instructions on the risks and wear personal protection equipment at the workplace,” Elfatih and colleagues wrote. “In addition, regular medical check-ups and good ventilation in the workplace should be considered.”
Perspective
Back to Top
The findings of this study are not surprising. Occupational exposure to wood dust has been shown to cause several respiratory disorders, which include allergic rhinitis, chronic bronchitis, asthma and sinonasal adenocarcinoma. Studies over the last few decades have also shown varying degrees of impairment in lung function. The study is significant in that it adds to the body of evidence that individuals who are being exposed to wood dust in their workplace and their employers should be made aware of the potential pulmonary risks. In addition, preventive (ie, ventilation) and protective (ie, masks) measures should be in place as well as appropriate monitoring of the worker’s respiratory function.
Respirable wood dust particles smaller than 20 µm are invisible to the naked eye and the smallest particles, less than 2.5 µm, can reach the alveoli and trigger symptoms of cough and sneezing as well as causing flares in underlying lung conditions as mentioned above. My patients who work in or have a hobby that potentially exposes them to wood dust are cautioned to wear appropriate face masks (surgical mask or preferably N95 masks) and if possible, improve ventilation in the area. Those patients of mine with asthma or COPD are counseled to consider alternative employment or hobbies, and at the very least use prophylactically a rescue inhaler, such as albuterol, 20 to 30 minutes prior to the known exposure as well as having it available while they are in the wood dust environment if symptoms flare.
Knowing that the respirable wood dust can trigger the above symptoms, physicians should discuss with their patients the potential respiratory risks, especially those with a lung condition mentioned above. It can be helpful to make more people aware that wood dust has been linked to an increased risk for upper and lower respiratory symptoms, as well as sinonasal cancer, even if they don’t have a known lung condition. These individuals should try to minimize exposure to other potential pulmonary risk factors such as cigarette smoking and be assessed at appropriate intervals with pulmonary function studies and/or imaging studies if symptoms become apparent.
Studies of this nature are important to continue to assess the potential negative effects on lung function of wood dust because the results will vary based on multiple variables that include wood dust concentration, particle size and exposure time, as well as a variety of background and individual factors such as the type of wood and a patient’s comorbidities. Next steps should be to assess the benefit of awareness campaigns and the measures put into place to reduce the exposure to respirable wood dust particles.
Collapse