Dataset Information

Workplace measurements by the US Occupational Safety and Health Administration since 1979: descriptive analysis and potential uses for exposure assessment.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Inspectors from the US Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) have been collecting industrial hygiene samples since 1972 to verify compliance with Permissible Exposure Limits. Starting in 1979, these measurements were computerized into the Integrated Management Information System (IMIS). In 2010, a dataset of over 1 million personal sample results analysed at OSHA's central laboratory in Salt Lake City [Chemical Exposure Health Data (CEHD)], only partially overlapping the IMIS database, was placed into public domain via the internet. We undertook this study to inform potential users about the relationship between this newly available OSHA data and IMIS and to offer insight about the opportunities and challenges associated with the use of OSHA measurement data for occupational exposure assessment.

Methods

We conducted a literature review of previous uses of IMIS in occupational health research and performed a descriptive analysis of the data recently made available and compared them to the IMIS database for lead, the most frequently sampled agent.

Results

The literature review yielded 29 studies reporting use of IMIS data, but none using the CEHD data. Most studies focused on a single contaminant, with silica and lead being most frequently analysed. Sixteen studies addressed potential bias in IMIS, mostly by examining the association between exposure levels and ancillary information. Although no biases of appreciable magnitude were consistently reported across studies and agents, these assessments may have been obscured by selective under-reporting of non-detectable measurements. The CEHD data comprised 1 450 836 records from 1984 to 2009, not counting analytical blanks and erroneous records. Seventy eight agents with >1000 personal samples yielded 1 037 367 records. Unlike IMIS, which contain administrative information (company size, job description), ancillary information in the CEHD data is mostly analytical. When the IMIS and CEHD measurements of lead were merged, 23 033 (39.2%) records were in common to both IMIS and CEHD datasets, 10 681 (18.2%) records were only in IMIS, and 25 012 (42.6%) records were only in the CEHD database. While IMIS-only records represent data analysed in other laboratories, CEHD-only records suggest partial reporting of sampling results by OSHA inspectors into IMIS. For lead, the percentage of non-detects in the CEHD-only data was 71% compared to 42% and 46% in the both-IMIS-CEHD and IMIS-only datasets, respectively, suggesting differential under-reporting of non-detects in IMIS.

Conclusions

IMIS and the CEHD datasets represent the biggest source of multi-industry exposure data in the USA and should be considered as a valuable source of information for occupational exposure assessment. The lack of empirical data on biases, adequate interpretation of non-detects in OSHA data, complicated by suspected differential under-reporting, remain the principal challenges to the valid estimation of average exposure conditions. We advocate additional comparisons between IMIS and CEHD data and discuss analytical strategies that may play a key role in meeting these challenges.

SUBMITTER: Lavoue J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3589950 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe knowledge, from laboratory studies dating back to the 1950s on the importance of the association between cardiorespiratory fitness and aerobic workload for workers health, is fundamental for promoting sustainable healthy employability among ageing blue-collar workers today. However, the association between cardiorespiratory fitness and aerobic workload has not yet been documented during daily work, and we do not know if it applies to the normal work of blue-collar workers in different age groups. We aim to investigate the association between cardiorespiratory fitness and aerobic workload among blue-collar workers using measurements of 24-h heart rate collected over consecutive working days.MethodsWe analyzed baseline cardiorespiratory fitness, assessed using a sub-maximal cycle ergometer test, and 1-4 days of 24-h heart rate measurement from 497 blue-collar workers participating in the DPHACTO study. We investigated the association between cardiorespiratory fitness and aerobic workload defined as the average percentage of heart rate reserve (%HRR), maximum %HRR and the duration time spent at a high HRR (> 30%) during working hours. The association was assessed using multivariate linear regression models adjusted for age, sex, self-rated health, shift-work, prescription medication and occupation, as well as for different age strata.ResultsHigher cardiorespiratory fitness was significantly associated with decreased mean %HRR -0.32 [95% CI -0.39 to -0.25], maximum %HRR -0.35 [95% CI -0.45 to -0.25] and time spent at ≥ 30% HRR; -1.8% [95% CI -2.2 to -1.5%]. These associations were evident across age groups, with slightly stronger associations for workers aged 46-51 (total range 18-68).ConclusionsHigher cardiorespiratory fitness was associated with the decreased aerobic workload during normal work across all age groups and levels of work intensity. Our findings highlight the importance of cardiorespiratory fitness when considering the workload and its relevance in the promotion of healthy sustainable employment.

Project description:To estimate the current occupational cancer burden due to past exposures in Britain, estimates of the number of exposed workers at different levels are required, as well as risk estimates of cancer due to the exposures. This paper describes the methods and results for estimating the historical exposures. All occupational carcinogens or exposure circumstances classified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer as definite or probable human carcinogens and potentially to be found in British workplaces over the past 20-40 years were included in this study. Estimates of the number of people exposed by industrial sector were based predominantly on two sources of data, the CARcinogen EXposure (CAREX) database and the UK Labour Force Survey. Where possible, multiple and overlapping exposures were taken into account. Dose-response risk estimates were generally not available in the epidemiological literature for the cancer-exposure pairs in this study, and none of the sources available for obtaining the numbers exposed provided data by different levels of exposure. Industrial sectors were therefore assigned using expert judgement to 'higher'- and 'lower'-exposure groups based on the similarity of exposure to the population in the key epidemiological studies from which risk estimates had been selected. Estimates of historical exposure prevalence were obtained for 41 carcinogens or occupational circumstances. These include exposures to chemicals and metals, combustion products, other mixtures or groups of chemicals, mineral and biological dusts, physical agents and work patterns, as well as occupations and industries that have been associated with increased risk of cancer, but for which the causative agents are unknown. There were more than half a million workers exposed to each of six carcinogens (radon, solar radiation, crystalline silica, mineral oils, non-arsenical insecticides and 2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin); other agents to which a large number of workers are exposed included benzene, diesel engine exhaust and environmental tobacco smoke. The study has highlighted several industrial sectors with large proportions of workers potentially exposed to multiple carcinogens. The relevant available data have been used to generate estimates of the prevalence of past exposure to occupational carcinogens to enable the occupational cancer burden in Britain to be estimated. These data are considered adequate for the present purpose, but new data on the prevalence and intensity of current occupational exposure to carcinogens should be collected to ensure that future policy decisions be based on reliable evidence.

Project description:Objectives:The Integrated Management Information System (IMIS) is the largest multi-industry source of exposure results available in North America. In 2010, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) released the Chemical Exposure Health Data (CEHD) that contains analytical results of samples collected by OSHA inspectors. However, the two databanks only partially overlap, raising suspicion of bias in IMIS data. We investigated the factors associated with selective recording of CEHD results into the IMIS databank. Methods:This analysis was based on personal exposure measurements of 24 agents from 1984 to 2009. The association between nine variables (level of exposure coded as detected versus non-detected (ND), whether a sampling result was part of a panel of chemicals, duration of sampling, issuance of a citation, presence of other detected levels during the same inspection, year, OSHA region, amount of penalty, and establishment size) and a CEHD sampling result being reported in IMIS was analyzed using modified Poisson regression. Results:A total of 461900 CEHD sampling results were examined. The proportion of CEHD sampling results recorded into IMIS was 38% (51% for detected and 28% for ND measurements). In the models, the detected sampling results were associated with a higher probability of recording into IMIS than ND sampling results, and this difference was similar for panel versus non-panel samples. Probability of recording remained constant from 1984 to 2009 for sampling results measured on panels but increased for sampling results of single determinations of an agent. Some OSHA regions had probability of recording two times higher than others. No other variables that we examined were associated with a CEHD sampling result being reported in IMIS. Conclusions:Our results indicate that the under-reporting of sampling results in IMIS is differential: ND results (especially those determined from the panels) seem less likely to be recorded in IMIS than other results. It is important to consider both IMIS and CEHD data in order to reduce bias in evaluation of exposures in workplaces inspected by OSHA.