This provides support for the existence of an exposure–response relationship between NCO exposure and skin symptoms (work-related and non-work-related) in auto body shop workers. In the second GSI-IX manufacturer analysis, reported skin symptoms were predictive of reporting respiratory symptoms in both occupational groups regardless of the symptom combination, an association that has rarely been investigated (Lynde et al. 2009). Results were unchanged after adjustment for age, sex, smoking, and atopy. The persistence of the association after adjustment for these variables suggests that there are other www.selleckchem.com/products/geneticin-g418-sulfate.html factors that lead to the co-existing skin and respiratory symptoms
(i.e., exposure). These results highlight the importance of considering both skin and respiratory outcomes in exposed workers as well as the importance of properly assessing both skin and airborne exposure in the workplace. In conclusion, reporting skin symptoms was strongly and consistently associated
with reporting S63845 cell line respiratory symptoms in both bakery and auto body shop workers. Additionally, exposure–response relationships for skin symptoms were observed in auto body shop workers; similar relationships for work-related skin symptoms in bakery workers did not reach statistical significance. There are several reasons why an association may have been missed in bakery workers, including poor correlation between airborne and skin exposure for the particulate exposure and the lack of information on other, potentially causal, exposures in the workplace. The lack of observed association in bakery workers should out be interpreted cautiously; exposure–response relationships for skin symptoms require more investigation in all occupations. These relationships must be better understood before more complex relationships are investigated; however, the overall goal remains the reduction of both airborne and skin exposure. Conflict of interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution License which permits any use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited. Electronic supplementary material Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material. Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 174 kb) References Aprea C, Lunghini L, Banchi B, Peruzzi A, Centi L, Coppi L et al (2009) Evaluation of inhaled and cutaneous doses of imidacloprid during stapling ornamental plants in tunnels or greenhouses. J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol 19(6):555–569CrossRef Burney PG, Laitinen LA, Perdrizet S, Huckauf H, Tattersfield AE, Chinn S et al (1989) Validity and repeatability of the IUATLD (1984) bronchial symptoms questionnaire: an international comparison.