PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Coffman, Vanessa R. AU - Hall, Devon J. AU - Pisanic, Nora AU - Love, David C. AU - Nadimpalli, Maya AU - McCormack, Meredith AU - Diener-West, Marie AU - Davis, Meghan F. AU - Heaney, Christopher D. TI - Self-reported work activities, mucus membrane symptoms, and respiratory health outcomes among an industrial hog operation worker cohort, North Carolina, USA AID - 10.1101/2020.09.29.20203893 DP - 2020 Jan 01 TA - medRxiv PG - 2020.09.29.20203893 4099 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/09/29/2020.09.29.20203893.short 4100 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/09/29/2020.09.29.20203893.full AB - Background Respiratory disease among industrial hog operation (IHO) workers is well documented; however, it remains unclear whether specific work activities are more harmful and if personal protective equipment (PPE), as used by workers, can reduce adverse health outcomes.Objectives To assess the relationship between self-reported IHO work activities and PPE use with mucus membrane and respiratory health symptoms in an occupational cohort.Methods IHO workers (n=103) completed baseline and up to eight bi-weekly (i.e., every two weeks) study visits. Workers reported typical (baseline) and transient (bi-weekly) work activities, PPE use, and physical health symptoms. Baseline and longitudinal associations between work activities and health outcomes were assessed using generalized logistic and fixed-effects logistic regression models, respectively.Results At baseline, reports of ever versus never drawing pig blood, applying pesticides, and increasing years worked at any IHO were positively associated with reports of eye, nose, and/or throat irritation. Over time, transient exposures, including those associated with dustiness in barns, cleaning of barns, and pig contact were associated with increased odds of symptoms including sneezing, headache, and eye or nose irritation, particularly in the highest categories of exposure. When PPE was used, workers had decreased odds of symptoms interfering with sleep (odds ratio (OR): 0.1; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.01, 0.8), sneezing (OR: 0.1; 95% CI: 0.01, 1.0), and eye or nose irritation (OR: 0.1; 95% CI: 0.02, 0.9). Similarly, when they washed their hands ≥8 times per shift (the median) versus less frequently, workers had decreased odds of any respiratory symptom (OR: 0.3; 95% CI: 0.1, 0.8).Discussion In this healthy volunteer IHO worker population, increasingly unfavorable work activities were associated with self-reported mucus membrane and respiratory health outcomes. Strong protective associations were seen between PPE use and handwashing and the odds of symptoms, warranting further investigation in intervention studies.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementFunding for this study was provided by National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) grant K01OH010193; Johns Hopkins NIOSH Education and Research Center grant T42OH008428; a directed research award from the Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future; the Johns Hopkins NIOSH Education and Research Center Pilot Award; award 018HEA2013 from the Sherrilyn and Ken Fisher Center for Environmental Infectious Diseases Discovery Program at the Johns Hopkins University, School of Medicine, Department of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases; and National Science Foundation (NSF) grant 1316318 as part of the joint NSF National Institutes of Health (NIH) U.S. Department of Agriculture Ecology and Evolution of Infectious Diseases program. V.R.C was supported by the Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future-Lerner Fellowship. N.P. was supported by NIH/National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) grant 5T32ES007141. D.L was supported by funds from the Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future. M.N. was supported by a Royster Society fellowship and a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Science to Achieve Results fellowship. C.D.H. was supported by NIOSH grant K01OH010193, E.W. Al Thrasher Award 10287, NIEHS grant R01ES026973, and NSF grant 1316318. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The study protocol was approved by the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health Institutional Review Board.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesDue to the exceedingly sensitive nature of the data collected, it will not be made publicly available.