ArticleMultidisciplinary respiratory medicine2025
What do the clinical and respiratory functional assessments of woodworkers in Parakou, West Africa, reveal?
Article in Multidisciplinary respiratory medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe prevalence of chronic respiratory diseases is increasing globally. Apart from smoking, other contributing factors include occupational exposures, of which wood dust is thought to play a role. This study aimed to investigate relationships between respiratory symptoms or lung function measurements and exposure to wood dust.
methodsThis was a prospective and comparative cross-sectional study carried out at Parakou, between June and September 2024. Overall, 108 woodworkers (exposed group) and 108 administrative agents from the city hall, the court and five selected banks (control group) were included. Data were collected on upper and lower respiratory symptoms persisting for at least one week in the last 12 months, demographic and occupational-related characteristics, comorbidities, lifestyles, followed by particulate matter measurements in the workplace and spirometry testing.
resultsThe mean ages of participants in exposed and control groups were 40±11 and 38±9 years-old, respectively (p=0.163). All were males. Seniority in the profession was longer in the exposed group (18±12 years vs 8±6 years; p<0.001). Workplace ventilation was found inadequate in the exposed group (27% vs 0%; p<0.001). In carpentry, Milicia excelsa (66%) and Afzelia africana (64%) were the types of wood most commonly used. Mean dust levels for PM10, PM2.5 and PM1.0 were 1.4±0.6 mg/m3, 1.2±0.6 mg/m3 and 1.2±0.6 mg/m3, respectively. Cleaning and protection methods for woodworkers included dry sweeping (61%), dust collection devices (7%), personal homemade face-masks (99%), and affiliation to company insurance schemes (12%).No worker had planned check-ups arranged with an occupational physician. Both respiratory symptoms (94% vs 56%; p<0.001) and work-related respiratory symptoms (92% vs 19%; p<0.001) were more common in the exposed versus control group. Exposure to wood dust (aPR=6.8; 95%CI=4.1-11.4; p<0.001) and asthma (aPR=5.4; 95%CI=2.9-10.1; p<0.001) were significantly associated with respiratory symptoms, after adjustment for biomass and passive smoking exposure and length in the profession. The exposed group had a higher prevalence of restrictive disorder suggestive pattern on spirometry than the control group (48% vs 20%; p<0.001).
conclusionsExposure to wood dust adversely affects respiratory function in woodworkers at Parakou, hence the need to raise awareness among these professionals and identify ways to improve their working conditions.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.