TAThe Ers Task Force On Specific Inhalation Challenges With Occupational Agents
The Ers Task Force On Specific Inhalation Challenges With Occupational Agents
+11
This consensus statement provides practical recommendations for specific inhalation challenge (SIC) in the diagnosis of occupational asthma. They are derived from a systematic literature search, a census of active European centres, a Delphi conference and expert consensus. This article details each step of a SIC, including safety requirements, techniques for delivering agents, and methods for assessing and interpreting bronchial responses. The limitations of the procedure are also discussed.Testing should only be carried out in hospitals where physicians and healthcare professionals have appropriate expertise. Tests should always include a control challenge, a gradual increase of exposure to the suspected agent, and close monitoring of the patient during the challenge and for at least 6 h afterwards. In expert centres, excessive reactions provoked by SIC are rare.A positive response is defined by a fall in forced expiratory volume in 1 s ≥15% from baseline. Equivocal reactions can sometimes be clarified by finding changes in nonspecific bronchial responsiveness, sputum eosinophils or exhaled nitric oxide. The sensitivity and specificity of SIC are high but not easily quantified, as the method is usually used as the reference standard for the diagnosis of occupational asthma.
The aim of this document was to provide a critical review of the current knowledge on hypersensitivity pneumonitis caused by the occupational environment and to propose practical guidance for the diagnosis and management of this condition. Occupational hypersensitivity pneumonitis (OHP) is an immunologic lung disease resulting from lymphocytic and frequently granulomatous inflammation of the peripheral airways, alveoli, and surrounding interstitial tissue which develops as the result of a non‐IgE‐mediated allergic reaction to a variety of organic materials or low molecular weight agents that are present in the workplace. The offending agents can be classified into six broad categories that include bacteria, fungi, animal proteins, plant proteins, low molecular weight chemicals, and metals. The diagnosis of OHP requires a multidisciplinary approach and relies on a combination of diagnostic tests to ascertain the work relatedness of the disease. Both the clinical and the occupational history are keys to the diagnosis and often will lead to the initial suspicion. Diagnostic criteria adapted to OHP are proposed. The cornerstone of treatment is early removal from exposure to the eliciting antigen, although the disease may show an adverse outcome even after avoidance of exposure to the causal agent.
Professional and domestic cleaning is associated with work‐related asthma (WRA). This position paper reviews the literature linking exposure to cleaning products and the risk of asthma and focuses on prevention. Increased risk of asthma has been shown in many epidemiological and surveillance studies, and several case reports describe the relationship between exposure to one or more cleaning agents and WRA. Cleaning sprays, bleach, ammonia, disinfectants, mixing products, and specific job tasks have been identified as specific causes and/or triggers of asthma. Because research conclusions and policy suggestions have remained unheeded by manufactures, vendors, and commercial cleaning companies, it is time for a multifaceted intervention. Possible preventive measures encompass the following: substitution of cleaning sprays, bleach, and ammonia; minimizing the use of disinfectants; avoidance of mixing products; use of respiratory protective devices; and worker education. Moreover, we suggest the education of unions, consumer, and public interest groups to encourage safer products. In addition, information activities for the general population with the purpose of improving the knowledge of professional and domestic cleaners regarding risks and available preventive measures and to promote strict collaboration between scientific communities and safety and health agencies are urgently needed.
The term irritant‐induced (occupational) asthma (IIA) has been used to denote various clinical forms of asthma related to irritant exposure at work. The causal relationship between irritant exposure(s) and the development of asthma can be substantiated by the temporal association between the onset of asthma symptoms and a single or multiple high‐level exposure(s) to irritants, whereas this relationship can only be inferred from epidemiological data for workers chronically exposed to moderate levels of irritants. Accordingly, the following clinical phenotypes should be distinguished within the wide spectrum of irritant‐related asthma: (i) definite IIA, that is acute‐onset IIA characterized by the rapid onset of asthma within a few hours after a single exposure to very high levels of irritant substances; (ii) probable IIA, that is asthma that develops in workers with multiple symptomatic high‐level exposures to irritants; and (iii) possible IIA, that is asthma occurring with a delayed‐onset after chronic exposure to moderate levels of irritants. This document prepared by a panel of experts summarizes our current knowledge on the diagnostic approach, epidemiology, pathophysiology, and management of the various phenotypes of IIA.
The present document is the result of a consensus reached by a panel of experts from European and non-European countries on Occupational Rhinitis (OR), a disease of emerging relevance which has received little attention in comparison to occupational asthma. The document covers the main items of OR including epidemiology, diagnosis, management, socio-economic impact, preventive strategies and medicolegal issues. An operational definition and classification of OR tailored on that of occupational asthma, as well as a diagnostic algorithm based on steps allowing for different levels of diagnostic evidence are proposed. The needs for future research are pointed out. Key messages are issued for each item.