Alavanja M C, Sandler D P, McDonnell C J, Lynch C F, Pennybacker M, Zahm S H, Lubin J, Mage D, Steen W C, Wintersteen W, Blair A
Epidemiology and Biostatistics Program, National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, MD 20892, USA.
Environ Health Perspect. 1998 Jul;106(7):415-20. doi: 10.1289/ehp.98106415.
To investigate factors associated with pesticide-related visits to health care providers (i.e., doctor or hospital visits), responses to self-administered questionnaires received from 35,879 licensed restricted-use pesticide applicators participating in the Agricultural Health Study were analyzed. (In Iowa, applicators are actually certified, whereas in North Carolina they are licensed; for ease of reference, the term license will be used for both states in this paper.) The cohort reported a total of more than 10.9 million pesticide-application days. These applications were associated with one or more pesticide-related health care visits by 2,214 applicators (7.0% of the applicator cohort for whom health care visit data were available). The odds of a pesticide-related health care visit were increased for commercial applicators compared to private applicators [odds ratio (OR = 1.77; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.52-2.06) and for applicators who used insecticides 70 times or more in their lifetime compared to those who used insecticides less frequently (OR = 1.43; CI, 1.26-1.63). After adjusting for the number of applications in a logistic regression model, significantly higher odds of health care visits were observed among North Carolina applicators compared to Iowa applicators (OR = 1.35; CI, 1.17-1.52), among applicators who mixed their own pesticides (OR = 1.65; CI, 1. 22-2.23), and among applicators who personally repaired their pesticide application equipment at least once per year (OR = 1.12; CI, 1.06-1.25). Significantly lower odds were found among female versus male applicators (OR = 0.68; CI, 0.46-0.99) and among applicators who graduated from high school versus those who did not (OR = 0.82; CI, 0.71-0.94 for high school graduates and OR = 0.79; CI, 0.68-0.91 for those with at least some college). Several methods of pesticide application to crops, seed, or stored grain were also associated with significantly elevated odds ratios of health care visits. These observations suggest that several steps can be taken to reduce the number of health care visits resulting from occupational exposure to pesticides. The implications of this pattern of pesticide-related health care visits may have etiologic implications for cancer and other chronic diseases.
为调查与因接触农药而就医(即看医生或去医院就诊)相关的因素,对参与农业健康研究的35879名持有受限使用农药许可证的施药者所填写的自填式调查问卷的回复进行了分析。(在爱荷华州,施药者实际上是获得认证,而在北卡罗来纳州他们是持有许可证;为便于参考,本文中两个州均使用“许可证”一词。)该队列报告的农药施用天数总计超过1090万天。这些施用与2214名施药者的一次或多次因农药相关的就医有关(在有就医数据的施药者队列中占7.0%)。与私人施药者相比,商业施药者因农药相关就医的几率增加[优势比(OR)=1.77;95%置信区间(CI),1.52 - 2.06],与一生中使用杀虫剂次数少于70次的施药者相比,一生中使用杀虫剂70次或更多次的施药者因农药相关就医的几率增加(OR = 1.43;CI,1.26 - 1.63)。在逻辑回归模型中对施用次数进行调整后,与爱荷华州施药者相比,北卡罗来纳州施药者(OR = 1.35;CI,1.17 - 1.52)、自行混合农药的施药者(OR = 1.65;CI,1.22 - 2.23)以及每年至少亲自维修一次农药施用设备的施药者(OR = 1.12;CI,1.06 - 1.25)因就医的几率显著更高。女性施药者与男性施药者相比(OR = 0.68;CI,0.46 - 0.99)以及高中毕业生施药者与未毕业施药者相比(高中毕业生的OR = 0.82;CI,0.71 - 0.94,至少上过一些大学的施药者的OR = 0.79;CI,0.68 - 0.91)因就医的几率显著更低。几种用于作物、种子或储存谷物的农药施用方法也与就医几率显著升高的优势比相关。这些观察结果表明,可以采取几个步骤来减少因职业接触农药而导致的就医次数。这种与农药相关的就医模式的影响可能对癌症和其他慢性病具有病因学意义。