Laboratory animals and respiratory allergies: The prevalence of allergies among laboratory animal workers and the need for prophylaxis

Abstract

OBJECTIVE:Subjects exposed to laboratory animals are at a heightened risk of developing respiratory and allergic diseases. These diseases can be prevented by simple measures such as the use of personal protective equipment. We report here the primary findings of the Laboratory Animals and Respiratory Allergies Study regarding the prevalence of allergic diseases among laboratory animal workers, the routine use of preventive measures in laboratories and animal facilities, and the need for prevention programs.METHODS:Animal handlers and non-animal handlers from 2 Brazilian universities (University of São Paulo and State University of Campinas) answered specific questionnaires to assess work conditions and symptoms. These subjects also underwent spirometry, a bronchial challenge test with mannitol, and skin prick tests for 11 common allergens and 5 occupational allergens (rat, mouse, guinea pig, hamster, and rabbit).RESULTS:Four hundred fifty-five animal handlers (32±10 years old [mean±SD], 209 men) and 387 non-animal handlers (33±11 years old, 121 men) were evaluated. Sensitization to occupational allergens was higher among animal handlers (16%) than non-animal handlers (3%, p<0.01). Accessibility to personal protective equipment was measured at 85% (median, considering 73 workplaces of the animal handler group). Nineteen percent of the animal handlers indicated that they wear a respirator at all times while handling animals or working in the animal room, and only 25% of the animal handlers had received an orientation about animal-induced allergies, asthma, or rhinitis.CONCLUSION:In conclusion, our data indicate that preventive programs are necessary. We suggest providing individual advice to workers associated with institutional programs to promote a safer work environment.

Study of risk factors for atopic sensitization, asthma, and bronchial hyperresponsiveness in animal laboratory workers

“…At least 90% of the subjects in each workplace consented to participate; the overall consent and participation rate was 95% 8) . The study was reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committees of both insti- …”

“…Sample selection and the study protocol have been previously described 8) . Study subjects were workers exposed to laboratory animals (exposed group) and those without such exposure (nonexposed group).…”

“…The nonexposed group consisted of management employees, students, secretaries, computer technicians, car drivers, and others who had no contact with laboratory animals and who worked in a building with no animals. For more details on characteristics of groups and subjects, refer to Ferraz et al 8) .…”

Animals

“…Any proteins of animal origin can potentially be sensitizing. Most epidemiological studies of occupational diseases from animal contact have been conducted among people working with laboratory animals and mostly concerning respiratory allergy (Cockroft et al 1981;Slovak and Hill 1981;Weissenbach et al 1988;Agrup and Sjöstedt 1985;Aoyama et al 1992;Ruoppi et al 2004;Ferraz et al 2013;Muzembo et al 2014;Palmberg et al 2015). Some studies have surveyed skin diseases in veterinarians or farmers (Susitaival et al 2001;Tauscher and Belsito 2002;Susitaival et al 1995).…”

Exposição à endotoxina no ambiente de trabalho e pesquisa de associação com asma, alergia e sibilo

“…As perguntas sobre a disponibilidade de máscaras respiratórias, óculos ou viseira de proteção, luvas e calçados apropriados para o local de trabalho, assim como o uso desses equipamentos de proteção individual (EPI) durante o contato com animais mostraram que os equipamentos de proteção individuais mais acessíveis foram luvas (99%) e os menos acessíveis foram sapatos específicos (36%). Dos tratadores de animais, 19% usavam máscaras respiratórias em todos os momentos durante o manuseio dos animais ou quando trabalhavam na sala de animais, somente 7% usavam óculos de proteção e 24% usavam sapatos específicos (FERRAZ et al, 2013).…”