Parihar Y S, Patnaik J P, Nema B K, Sahoo G B, Misra I B, Adhikary S
South Eastern Coalfields Limited, Bilaspur, Madhya Pradesh, India.
Ind Health. 1997 Oct;35(4):467-73. doi: 10.2486/indhealth.35.467.
With objective to find out prevalence of Coal Worker's Pneumoconiosis and variation among readers in reading x-ray plates for pneumoconiosis, a retrospective epidemiological survey of Coal Worker's Pneumoconiosis was undertaken in 72 collieries of Madhya Pradesh and Orissa by re-reading of x-ray plates taken during the Periodical Medical Examination at the Occupational Health Units over a period of 5 years. Six readers, trained abroad in reading pneumoconiosis x-ray plates, were involved for the study. Each reader reported approximately one sixth of the available x-ray plates of all the collieries and classified on the 12 point scale of I.L.O. (International Labour Organisation) 1980 in special format. Total 43,504 chest x-rays were reviewed. The overall prevalence was found to be 3.03%, ranging from 1.52% to 4.76% between 10 areas (group of mines). Major category of profusion was category-I (81.09%), followed by category-II (17.84%). Only 3 cases of Progressive Massive Fibrosis (PMF) were detected. Round shaped opacities are predominant (89.59%) in Coal Worker's Pneumoconiosis. Among the opacities, 'p' type is more prevalent (48.29%) followed by 'q' type (40.62%). There was variation amongst the different readers and ranged from 1.14% to 6.76% for reporting the prevalence of Coal Worker's Pneumoconiosis. However, when analysis of six readers for inter reader variation was conducted, that shows no abnormal deviation in the reading of any of the readers.
为了查明煤工尘肺的患病率以及读者在解读尘肺病X光片时的差异，对中央邦和奥里萨邦的72个煤矿进行了煤工尘肺回顾性流行病学调查，通过重新阅读职业健康单位在5年期间定期体检时拍摄的X光片来进行。六名在国外接受过尘肺病X光片解读培训的读者参与了这项研究。每位读者报告了所有煤矿约六分之一的可用X光片，并按照国际劳工组织（ILO）1980年的12分制特殊格式进行分类。共审查了43504张胸部X光片。总体患病率为3.03%，在10个区域（矿区组）之间从1.52%到4.76%不等。主要的密集度类别是I类（81.09%），其次是II类（17.84%）。仅检测到3例进行性大块纤维化（PMF）。圆形阴影在煤工尘肺中占主导（89.59%）。在阴影中，“p”型更普遍（48.29%），其次是“q”型（40.62%）。不同读者之间存在差异，报告的煤工尘肺患病率从1.14%到6.76%不等。然而，当对六名读者进行读者间差异分析时，结果显示任何一位读者的解读都没有异常偏差。
