Exposure to Elevated Carbon Monoxide Levels at an Indoor Ice Arena — Wisconsin, 2014

Creswell, Paul D.; Meiman, Jon G; Nehls-Lowe, Henry; Vogt, Christy; Wozniak, Ryan J.; Werner, Mark; Anderson, Henry A.

doi:10.15585/mmwr.mm6445a3

Cited by 11 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…If multiple people exhibit CO poisoning symptoms simultaneously, it may alert others to leave the area, which may help limit the length of exposure and mitigate severe symptoms. 3,20,25,26 Alternatively, CO poisoning may be especially dangerous for people who work alone, because others are not present to help recognize and escape danger. Employees performing rigorous activities for their work are especially at risk of CO poisoning because CO absorption is proportionate to respiratory effort.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Occupational Carbon Monoxide Poisoning in Wisconsin: Results From a Statewide Electronic Disease Surveillance System and From the Wisconsin Poison Center, 2018-2021

Andreychak,

Tomasallo,

Idowu

et al. 2023

Public Health Rep

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: Prevention methods for carbon monoxide (CO) poisoning in Wisconsin address occupational and nonoccupational exposures together, but differences between the settings could inform new approaches to preventing occupational CO poisonings. We described occupational CO poisonings in Wisconsin from July 1, 2018, through July 1, 2021, using surveillance data from the Wisconsin Electronic Disease Surveillance System and Wisconsin Poison Center. Methods: We identified cases of CO poisoning from the Wisconsin Electronic Disease Surveillance System and Wisconsin Poison Center. Occupational CO poisonings were records where “workplace” was recorded as the location of exposure. We excluded records classified as suspect/not a case, those missing laboratory results or information on exposure source/location, and intentional poisonings. We compared characteristics between occupational and nonoccupational settings using odds ratios (ORs), and we estimated crude incidence rates of occupational exposures by occupation. Results: We identified 614 cases of CO poisoning, of which 168 (27.4%) were occupational exposures. When compared with patients with nonoccupational exposures, patients with occupational exposures were more likely to be male (OR = 3.8; 95% CI, 2.4-6.1), Hispanic (OR = 2.4; 95% CI, 1.4-4.2), and younger (mean difference [SD] = 6.6 [20.9]). Several CO sources were significantly associated with occupational poisonings: forklifts (OR = 58.4; 95% CI, 13.9-246.1; P < .001), pressure sprayers (OR = 2.4; 95% CI, 1.3-4.4; P = .003), and other gasoline-powered tools (OR = 3.8; 95% CI, 2.3-6.3; P < .001). The natural resources, construction, and maintenance occupation group had the highest crude incidence rate—45.0 poisonings per 100 000 full-time equivalent employees. Conclusions: Incorporating data from the Wisconsin Poison Center improved data quality, but surveillance is limited by underreporting. Creating strategies to increase reporting would allow for a more comprehensive understanding of occupational CO poisoning.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Occupational Carbon Monoxide Poisoning in Wisconsin: Results From a Statewide Electronic Disease Surveillance System and From the Wisconsin Poison Center, 2018-2021

Andreychak,

Tomasallo,

Idowu

et al. 2023

Public Health Rep

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Common sources include motor vehicle exhaust; heating units and generators; improperly functioning chimneys; and indoor vehicles operation such as propane-fueled forklifts and Zambonis [1,2]. At least in North America, during times of severe inclement weather when loss of power occurs, increased use of propane heaters in poorly vented rooms has led to a number of large outbreaks of CO poisoning [3].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Neurologic and Pregnancy Effects of Carbon Monoxide Exposure

Bird¹

2017

Toxicol Open Access

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Carbon monoxide exposure remains a public health concern worldwide. Despite the burden that carbon monoxide exerts, significant controversy exists regarding optimal treatment of exposed persons. Particular controversy exists around neurologic effects of carbon monoxide exposure, how best to evaluate for neurocognitive dysfunction, and effects on the fetus of pregnant women. This review focuses on the mechanism of injury from carbon monoxide, and summarizes the data regarding neurocognitive dysfunction and fetal effects of exposure.

show abstract