Department of Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health, Addis Ababa University, Addis Ababa P.O. Box 9086, Ethiopia.
Research Group for Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Department of Global Public and Primary Care, University of Bergen, 5020 Bergen, Norway.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Jun 17;19(12):7427. doi: 10.3390/ijerph19127427.
Pesticide use in Ethiopia has become a common practice in which large-scale flower farms are the main consumers. Workers on flower farms might be exposed to pesticides while spraying or while performing other tasks related to pesticide use and management. It is unclear whether working as a flower farm sprayer is associated with respiratory health problems.
The objective of this study was to compare respiratory symptoms and lung function indices between pesticide sprayers and non-spraying workers.
A cross-sectional study was conducted on 15 flower farms, involving all-male sprayers as the pesticide-exposed group and all other male workers as a control group. Data were collected using a standard questionnaire for respiratory symptoms developed by the British Medical Research Council and the American Thoracic Society. Lung function tests were performed to determine forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory volume at one second (FEV), mid 50 expiratory flow, and the ratio of FEV to FVC. Chi-squared tests and Poisson regression analyses were used to compare respiratory symptoms between the two working groups. General linear regression models were used to compare lung function test indices between spraying and non-spraying working groups. The significance level was set to 0.05.
A total of 285 male workers participated (152 sprayers and 133 non-spraying workers). The mean age of the workers was 25 years for sprayers and 24 years for non-sprayers. The proportions of cough, cough with sputum, breathlessness, and wheezing were similar in the two groups, while chest tightness was significantly high in the non-spraying group. Sprayers had significantly higher FVC and FEV1 than the non-spraying group.
Respiratory symptoms were not different between the sprayers and non-spraying workers except that the non-spraying workers had increased chest tightness. FVC and FEV1 were significantly higher among sprayers relative to non-sprayers. The results must be interpreted with caution, as the sprayers used respiratory protective equipment, which probably reduced their exposure to the pesticides. Also, the workers were young, and a healthy worker effect might be present among the sprayers.
在埃塞俄比亚，使用农药已成为一种常见做法，大规模花卉农场是主要消费者。花卉农场的工人在喷洒农药或从事其他与农药使用和管理相关的任务时，可能会接触到农药。目前尚不清楚作为花卉农场的喷雾器工人是否与呼吸健康问题有关。
本研究旨在比较农药喷雾器工人和非喷雾器工人之间的呼吸症状和肺功能指标。
在 15 个花卉农场进行了一项横断面研究，将所有男性喷雾器工人作为农药暴露组，所有其他男性工人作为对照组。使用英国医学研究委员会和美国胸科学会制定的标准呼吸症状问卷收集数据。进行肺功能测试以确定用力肺活量（FVC）、一秒用力呼气量（FEV1）、中 50 呼气流量和 FEV1/FVC 比值。使用卡方检验和泊松回归分析比较两组工人的呼吸症状。使用一般线性回归模型比较喷雾器和非喷雾器工作人群的肺功能测试指标。显著性水平设为 0.05。
共有 285 名男性工人参与（喷雾器 152 人，非喷雾器 133 人）。工人的平均年龄为喷雾器 25 岁，非喷雾器 24 岁。两组咳嗽、咳痰、呼吸困难和喘息的比例相似，但非喷雾器组的胸闷比例明显较高。喷雾器工人的 FVC 和 FEV1 明显高于非喷雾器组。
除非喷雾器工人胸闷明显较高外，喷雾器工人和非喷雾器工人的呼吸症状无差异。与非喷雾器工人相比，喷雾器工人的 FVC 和 FEV1 明显较高。结果必须谨慎解释，因为喷雾器工人使用了呼吸防护设备，这可能减少了他们接触农药的机会。此外，工人年龄较轻，可能存在喷雾器工人的健康工人效应。
