Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37191914›Full record

ArticleAnnals of work exposures and health2023

Exposure levels of dust, endotoxin, and microorganisms in the Danish recycling industry.

Karoline Kærgaard Hansen, Vivi Schlünssen, Karin Broberg, Kirsten Østergaard, Margit W Frederiksen, Anne Mette Madsen, Henrik Albert Kolstad

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of work exposures and health, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Karoline Kærgaard HansenDepartment of Occupational Medicine, Danish Ramazzini Centre, Aarhus University Hospital, DK-8200 Aarhus N, Denmark.
Vivi SchlünssenDepartment of Public Health, Research Unit for Environment Occupation and Health, Danish Ramazzini Centre, Aarhus University, DK-8000 Aarhus C, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0003-4915-1734
Karin BrobergDivision of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Lund University, SE-221 85 Lund, Sweden.
Kirsten ØstergaardDepartment of Public Health, Research Unit for Environment Occupation and Health, Danish Ramazzini Centre, Aarhus University, DK-8000 Aarhus C, Denmark.
Margit W FrederiksenNational Research Centre of the Working Environment, DK-2100 Copenhagen Ø, Denmark.
Anne Mette MadsenNational Research Centre of the Working Environment, DK-2100 Copenhagen Ø, Denmark.ORCID 0000-0002-5895-7521
Henrik Albert KolstadDepartment of Occupational Medicine, Danish Ramazzini Centre, Aarhus University Hospital, DK-8200 Aarhus N, Denmark.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionRecycling of domestic waste and a number of employees in the recycling industry is expected to increase. This study aims to quantify current exposure levels of inhalable dust, endotoxin, and microorganisms and to identify determinants of exposure among recycling workers.

methodsThis cross-sectional study included 170 full-shift measurements from 88 production workers and 14 administrative workers from 12 recycling companies in Denmark. The companies recycle domestic waste (sorting, shredding, and extracting materials from waste). We collected inhalable dust with personal samplers that were analysed for endotoxin (n = 170) and microorganisms (n = 101). Exposure levels of inhalable dust, endotoxin, and microorganisms and potential determinants of exposure were explored by mixed-effects models.

resultsThe production workers were 7-fold or higher exposed to inhalable dust, endotoxin, bacteria, and fungi than the administrative workers. Among production workers recycling domestic waste, the geometric mean exposure level was 0.6 mg/m3 for inhalable dust, 10.7 endotoxin unit (EU)/m3 for endotoxin, 1.6 × 104 colony forming units (CFU)/m³ of bacteria, 4.4 × 104 CFU/m³ of fungi (25 °C), and 1.0 × 103 CFU/m³ of fungi (37 °C). Workers handling paper or cardboard had higher exposure levels than workers handling other waste fractions. The temperature did not affect exposure levels, although there was a tendency toward increased exposure to bacteria and fungi with higher temperatures. For inhalable dust and endotoxin, exposure levels during outdoor work were low compared to indoor work. For bacteria and fungi, indoor ventilation decreased exposure. The work task, waste fraction, temperature, location, mechanical ventilation, and the company size explained around half of the variance of levels of inhalable dust, endotoxin, bacteria, and fungi.

conclusionThe production workers of the Danish recycling industry participating in this study had higher exposure levels of inhalable dust, endotoxin, bacteria, and fungi than the administrative workers. Exposure levels of inhalable dust and endotoxin among recycling workers in Denmark were generally below established or suggested occupational exposure limits (OEL). However, 43% to 58% of the individual measurements of bacteria and fungi were above the suggested OEL. The waste fraction was the most influential determinant for exposure, and the highest exposure levels were seen during handling paper or cardboard. Future studies should examine the relationship between exposure levels and health effects among workers recycling domestic waste.

Indexed as

Air Pollutants, OccupationalOccupational ExposureBacteriaCross-Sectional StudiesDenmarkDustEndotoxinsEnvironmental MonitoringFungiHumansInhalation ExposureAir Pollutants, OccupationalDustEndotoxinsbacteriabioaerosoldomestic wasteendotoxinfungiinhalable dustOccupational exposureorganic dustrecycling workers

Identifiers

PMID37191914
PMCPMC10410489

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.