Occupational allergy after exposure to caddis flies at a hydroelectric power plant

A. Kraut, Jeff A Sloan, F. Silviu-Dan, Z. Peng, D. Gagnon, R. Warrington

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

A cross sectional survey was conducted in a hydroelectric power plant in which the workforce was exposed to large numbers of caddis flies. 28 of 57 employees participated. About 50% of the participants reported work related eye, nose, and sinus symptoms and wheezing. Working in locations with greater exposure to caddis flies was significantly associated with work related symptoms. 17 workers (61%) were skin prick positive to a laboratory prepared caddis fly antigen (LCFA) made from the remains of caddis flies present in the plant and 11 (39%) had positive reactions to a commercial caddis fly antigen (CCFA). Workers stationed in heavily exposed areas were 3.7 times as likely to have a positive response to the LCFA (p = 0.009) and 5.3 times as likely to have a positive response to the CCFA (p = 0.036). 13 (46%) of survey respondents reported three or more work related symptoms. 10 (91%) CCFA positive workers reported three or more work related symptoms. Pulmonary function studies revealed slight, but not significantly decreased forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1), and FEV1/FVC ratios in workers who were skin test positive to either caddis fly preparation when compared with those who were negative. One worker who was skin test positive to both antigens had a cross shift fall in FEV1 of 20% predicted. Occupational allergy to caddis flies proved to be a significant health problem at this work site.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)408-413
Number of pages6
JournalOccupational and Environmental Medicine
Volume51
Issue number6
StatePublished - 1994
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Power Plants
hydroelectric power plant
allergy
Diptera
Hypersensitivity
antigen
Antigens
skin
Vital Capacity
Skin Tests
exposure
Respiratory Sounds
Forced Expiratory Volume
Nose
Workplace
Cross-Sectional Studies

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
  • Environmental Science(all)

Cite this

Kraut, A., Sloan, J. A., Silviu-Dan, F., Peng, Z., Gagnon, D., & Warrington, R. (1994). Occupational allergy after exposure to caddis flies at a hydroelectric power plant. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 51(6), 408-413.

Occupational allergy after exposure to caddis flies at a hydroelectric power plant. / Kraut, A.; Sloan, Jeff A; Silviu-Dan, F.; Peng, Z.; Gagnon, D.; Warrington, R.

In: Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Vol. 51, No. 6, 1994, p. 408-413.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Kraut, A, Sloan, JA, Silviu-Dan, F, Peng, Z, Gagnon, D & Warrington, R 1994, 'Occupational allergy after exposure to caddis flies at a hydroelectric power plant', Occupational and Environmental Medicine, vol. 51, no. 6, pp. 408-413.
Kraut, A. ; Sloan, Jeff A ; Silviu-Dan, F. ; Peng, Z. ; Gagnon, D. ; Warrington, R. / Occupational allergy after exposure to caddis flies at a hydroelectric power plant. In: Occupational and Environmental Medicine. 1994 ; Vol. 51, No. 6. pp. 408-413.
@article{5e100f513aa24e68912a66b25ef8f701,
title = "Occupational allergy after exposure to caddis flies at a hydroelectric power plant",
abstract = "A cross sectional survey was conducted in a hydroelectric power plant in which the workforce was exposed to large numbers of caddis flies. 28 of 57 employees participated. About 50{\%} of the participants reported work related eye, nose, and sinus symptoms and wheezing. Working in locations with greater exposure to caddis flies was significantly associated with work related symptoms. 17 workers (61{\%}) were skin prick positive to a laboratory prepared caddis fly antigen (LCFA) made from the remains of caddis flies present in the plant and 11 (39{\%}) had positive reactions to a commercial caddis fly antigen (CCFA). Workers stationed in heavily exposed areas were 3.7 times as likely to have a positive response to the LCFA (p = 0.009) and 5.3 times as likely to have a positive response to the CCFA (p = 0.036). 13 (46{\%}) of survey respondents reported three or more work related symptoms. 10 (91{\%}) CCFA positive workers reported three or more work related symptoms. Pulmonary function studies revealed slight, but not significantly decreased forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1), and FEV1/FVC ratios in workers who were skin test positive to either caddis fly preparation when compared with those who were negative. One worker who was skin test positive to both antigens had a cross shift fall in FEV1 of 20{\%} predicted. Occupational allergy to caddis flies proved to be a significant health problem at this work site.",
author = "A. Kraut and Sloan, {Jeff A} and F. Silviu-Dan and Z. Peng and D. Gagnon and R. Warrington",
year = "1994",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "51",
pages = "408--413",
journal = "Occupational and Environmental Medicine",
issn = "1351-0711",
publisher = "BMJ Publishing Group",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Occupational allergy after exposure to caddis flies at a hydroelectric power plant

AU - Kraut, A.

AU - Sloan, Jeff A

AU - Silviu-Dan, F.

AU - Peng, Z.

AU - Gagnon, D.

AU - Warrington, R.

PY - 1994

Y1 - 1994

N2 - A cross sectional survey was conducted in a hydroelectric power plant in which the workforce was exposed to large numbers of caddis flies. 28 of 57 employees participated. About 50% of the participants reported work related eye, nose, and sinus symptoms and wheezing. Working in locations with greater exposure to caddis flies was significantly associated with work related symptoms. 17 workers (61%) were skin prick positive to a laboratory prepared caddis fly antigen (LCFA) made from the remains of caddis flies present in the plant and 11 (39%) had positive reactions to a commercial caddis fly antigen (CCFA). Workers stationed in heavily exposed areas were 3.7 times as likely to have a positive response to the LCFA (p = 0.009) and 5.3 times as likely to have a positive response to the CCFA (p = 0.036). 13 (46%) of survey respondents reported three or more work related symptoms. 10 (91%) CCFA positive workers reported three or more work related symptoms. Pulmonary function studies revealed slight, but not significantly decreased forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1), and FEV1/FVC ratios in workers who were skin test positive to either caddis fly preparation when compared with those who were negative. One worker who was skin test positive to both antigens had a cross shift fall in FEV1 of 20% predicted. Occupational allergy to caddis flies proved to be a significant health problem at this work site.

AB - A cross sectional survey was conducted in a hydroelectric power plant in which the workforce was exposed to large numbers of caddis flies. 28 of 57 employees participated. About 50% of the participants reported work related eye, nose, and sinus symptoms and wheezing. Working in locations with greater exposure to caddis flies was significantly associated with work related symptoms. 17 workers (61%) were skin prick positive to a laboratory prepared caddis fly antigen (LCFA) made from the remains of caddis flies present in the plant and 11 (39%) had positive reactions to a commercial caddis fly antigen (CCFA). Workers stationed in heavily exposed areas were 3.7 times as likely to have a positive response to the LCFA (p = 0.009) and 5.3 times as likely to have a positive response to the CCFA (p = 0.036). 13 (46%) of survey respondents reported three or more work related symptoms. 10 (91%) CCFA positive workers reported three or more work related symptoms. Pulmonary function studies revealed slight, but not significantly decreased forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1), and FEV1/FVC ratios in workers who were skin test positive to either caddis fly preparation when compared with those who were negative. One worker who was skin test positive to both antigens had a cross shift fall in FEV1 of 20% predicted. Occupational allergy to caddis flies proved to be a significant health problem at this work site.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0028225721&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0028225721&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 8044233

AN - SCOPUS:0028225721

VL - 51

SP - 408

EP - 413

JO - Occupational and Environmental Medicine

JF - Occupational and Environmental Medicine

SN - 1351-0711

IS - 6

ER -