Respiratory Health Division, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Morgantown, West Virginia, USA.
Department of Epidemiology, Human Genetics and Environmental Sciences, School of Public Health, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas, USA.
Am J Ind Med. 2021 Mar;64(3):165-169. doi: 10.1002/ajim.23208. Epub 2020 Dec 29.
The objective was to update the 2011 Cochrane systematic review on the effectiveness of workplace interventions for the treatment of occupational asthma.
A systematic review was conducted with the selection of articles and reports through 2019. The quality of extracted data was evaluated, and meta-analyses were conducted using techniques recommended by the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.
Data were extracted from 26 nonrandomized controlled before-and-after studies. The mean number of participants per study was 62 and the mean follow-up time was 4.5 years. Compared with continued exposure, removal from exposure had an increased likelihood of improved symptoms and change in spirometry. Reduction of exposure also had more favorable results for symptom improvement than continued exposure, but no difference for change in spirometry. Comparing exposure removal to reduction revealed an advantage for removal with both symptom improvement and change in spirometry for the larger group of patients exposed to low-molecular-weight agents. Also, the risk of unemployment was greater for exposure removal versus reduction.
Exposure removal and reduction had better outcomes than continued exposure. Removal from exposure was more likely to improve symptoms and spirometry than reduction among patients exposed to low-molecular-weight agents. The potential benefits associated with exposure removal versus reduction need to be weighed against the potential for unemployment that is more likely with removal from exposure. The findings are based on data graded as very low quality, and additional studies are needed to generate higher quality data.
本研究旨在更新 2011 年 Cochrane 系统评价中关于职业性哮喘治疗的工作场所干预措施的有效性。
通过 2019 年的文章和报告选择,进行了系统评价。评估了提取数据的质量,并使用 Cochrane 干预系统评价手册推荐的技术进行了荟萃分析。
从 26 项非随机对照前后研究中提取数据。每项研究的平均参与者人数为 62 人,平均随访时间为 4.5 年。与持续暴露相比,脱离暴露更有可能改善症状和肺功能改变。减少暴露也比持续暴露更有利于改善症状,但对肺功能改变没有影响。比较暴露去除与暴露减少,发现去除暴露在改善症状和肺功能改变方面对于接触低分子量物质的较大患者群体具有优势。此外,与减少暴露相比,去除暴露更有可能导致失业。
暴露去除和减少比持续暴露有更好的结果。与减少暴露相比,接触低分子量物质的患者中,脱离暴露更有可能改善症状和肺功能。与去除暴露相比,去除暴露与减少暴露的潜在益处需要与更有可能发生的失业风险相权衡。研究结果基于质量等级非常低的数据,需要进一步的研究来生成更高质量的数据。