Renee Carey

Estimated prevalence of exposure to occupational carcinogens in Australia (2011-2012)

Background and objectives Although past studies of workplace exposures have contributed greatly to our understanding of carcinogens, significant knowledge gaps still exist with regard to the actual extent of exposure among current workers, with no routinely collected population-based data being available in most countries. This study, the Australian Work Exposures Study (AWES), aimed to investigate the current prevalence of occupational exposure to carcinogens. Methods A random sample of men and women aged between 18 and 65, who were currently in paid employment, were invited to participate in a telephone interview collecting information about their current job and various demographic factors. Interviews were conducted using a web-based application (OccIDEAS). OccIDEAS uses the expert exposure method in which participants are asked about their job tasks and predefined algorithms are used to automatically assign exposures. Responses were obtained from 5023 eligible Australian residents, resulting in an overall response rate of 53%. Results 1879 respondents (37.6%) were assessed as being exposed to at least one occupational carcinogen in their current job. Extrapolation of these figures to the Australian working population suggested 3.6 million (40.3%) current workers could be exposed to carcinogens in their workplace. Exposure prevalence was highest among farmers, drivers, miners and transport workers, as well as men and those residing in regional areas. Conclusions This study demonstrates a practical, web-based approach to collecting population information on occupational exposure to carcinogens and documents the high prevalence of current exposure to occupational carcinogens in the general population.

Dermal exposure associated with occupational end use of pesticides and the role of protective measures.

Background Occupational end users of pesticides may experience bodily absorption of the pesticide products they use, risking possible health effects. The purpose of this paper is to provide a guide for researchers, practitioners, and policy makers working in the field of agricultural health or other areas where occupational end use of pesticides and exposure issues are of interest. Methods This paper characterizes the health effects of pesticide exposure, jobs associated with pesticide use, pesticide-related tasks, absorption of pesticides through the skin, and the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) for reducing exposure. Conclusions Although international and national efforts to reduce pesticide exposure through regulatory means should continue, it is difficult in the agricultural sector to implement engineering or system controls. It is clear that use of PPE does reduce dermal pesticide exposure but compliance among the majority of occupationally exposed pesticide end users appears to be poor. More research is needed on higher-order controls to reduce pesticide exposure and to understand the reasons for poor compliance with PPE and identify effective training methods.

Cancers in Australia in 2010 attributable to modifiable factors: summary and conclusions.

Objective: To estimate the numbers and proportions of cancers occurring in Australia in 2010 attributable to modifiable causal factors.

Occupational Exposure to Solar Radiation in Australia: Who is Exposed and What Protection do They Use?

Objective: Solar ultraviolet radiation (UVR) exposure is widely recognised as a leading cause of skin cancer, with outdoor workers being particularly at risk. Little is known on a national level about how many workers are exposed to solar radiation, the circumstances in which they are exposed, or their use of protective measures.

An advance letter did not increase the response rates in a telephone survey: a randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE To test the impact of an advance letter on response and cooperation rates in a nationwide telephone survey, given previous inconsistent results. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING Within the context of a larger telephone survey, 1,000 Australian households were randomly selected to take part in this trial. Half were randomly allocated to receive an advance letter, whereas the remainder did not receive any advance communication. Response and cooperation rates were compared between the two groups. RESULTS A total of 244 interviews were completed, 134 of which were with households that had been sent an advance letter. Intention-to-treat analysis revealed no significant difference in response between those who had received a letter and those who had not (26.8% vs. 22.0%, respectively). In addition, there was no significant difference between the groups in terms of either cooperation (78.4% vs. 79.7%) or response rate (56.3% vs. 57.9%), and no clear differences emerged in terms of the demographic characteristics of the two groups. CONCLUSION An advance letter was not seen to be effective in increasing response or cooperation rates in a nationwide telephone survey. Researchers should consider alternative methods of increasing participation in telephone surveys.

The Australian Work Exposures Study: Occupational Exposure to Lead and Lead Compounds

INTRODUCTION The aims of this study were to produce a population-based estimate of the prevalence of work-related exposure to lead and its compounds, to identify the main circumstances of exposures, and to collect information on the use of workplace control measures designed to decrease those exposures. METHODS Data came from the Australian Workplace Exposures Study, a nationwide telephone survey which investigated the current prevalence and circumstances of work-related exposure to 38 known or suspected carcinogens, including lead, among Australian workers aged 18-65 years. Using the web-based tool, OccIDEAS, semi-quantitative information was collected about exposures in the current job held by the respondent. Questions were addressed primarily at tasks undertaken rather than about self-reported exposures. RESULTS A total of 307 (6.1%) of the 4993 included respondents were identified as probably being exposed to lead in the course of their work. Of these, almost all (96%) were male; about half worked in trades and technician-related occupations, and about half worked in the construction industry. The main tasks associated with probable exposures were, in decreasing order: soldering; sanding and burning off paint while painting old houses, ships, or bridges; plumbing work; cleaning up or sifting through the remains of a fire; radiator-repair work; machining metals or alloys containing lead; mining; welding leaded steel; and working at or using indoor firing ranges. Where information on control measures was available, inconsistent use was reported. Applied to the Australian working population, approximately 6.3% [95% confidence interval (CI) = 5.6-7.0] of all workers (i.e. 631000, 95% CI 566000-704000 workers) were estimated to have probable occupational exposure to lead. CONCLUSIONS Lead remains an important exposure in many different occupational circumstances in Australia and probably other developed countries. This information can be used to support decisions on priorities for intervention and control of occupational exposure to lead and estimates of burden of cancer arising from occupational exposure to lead.

A comprehensive list of asthmagens to inform health interventions in the Australian workplace

Objective: To develop a comprehensive list of asthmagens which may occur in occupational settings in Australia.

The Australian Work Exposures Study: Prevalence of Occupational Exposure to Formaldehyde

INTRODUCTION The aims of this study were to produce a population-based estimate of the prevalence of work-related exposure to formaldehyde, to identify the main circumstances of exposure and to describe the use of workplace control measures designed to decrease those exposures. METHODS The analysis used data from the Australian Workplace Exposures Study, a nationwide telephone survey, which investigated the current prevalence and exposure circumstances of work-related exposure to 38 known or suspected carcinogens, including formaldehyde, among Australian workers aged 18-65 years. Using the web-based tool OccIDEAS, semi-quantitative information was collected about exposures in the current job held by the respondent. Questions were addressed primarily at tasks undertaken rather than about self-reported exposures. RESULTS Of the 4993 included respondents, 124 (2.5%) were identified as probably being exposed to formaldehyde in the course of their work [extrapolated to 2.6% of the Australian working population-265 000 (95% confidence interval 221 000-316 000) workers]. Most (87.1%) were male. About half worked in technical and trades occupations. In terms of industry, about half worked in the construction industry. The main circumstances of exposure were working with particle board or plywood typically through carpentry work, building maintenance, or sanding prior to painting; with the more common of other exposures circumstances being firefighters involved in fighting fires, fire overhaul, and clean-up or back-burning; and health workers using formaldehyde when sterilizing equipment or in a pathology laboratory setting. The use of control measures was inconsistent. CONCLUSION Workers are exposed to formaldehyde in many different occupational circumstances. Information on the exposure circumstances can be used to support decisions on appropriate priorities for intervention and control of occupational exposure to formaldehyde, and estimates of burden of cancer arising from occupational exposure to formaldehyde.

The future excess fraction of occupational cancer among those exposed to carcinogens at work in Australia in 2012

BACKGROUND Studies in other countries have generally found approximately 4% of current cancers to be attributable to past occupational exposures. This study aimed to estimate the future burden of cancer resulting from current occupational exposures in Australia. METHODS The future excess fraction method was used to estimate the future burden of occupational cancer (2012-2094) among the proportion of the Australian working population who were exposed to occupational carcinogens in 2012. Calculations were conducted for 19 cancer types and 53 cancer-exposure pairings, assuming historical trends and current patterns continued to 2094. RESULTS The cohort of 14.6 million Australians of working age in 2012 will develop an estimated 4.8 million cancers during their lifetime, of which 68,500 (1.4%) are attributable to occupational exposure in those exposed in 2012. The majority of these will be lung cancers (n=26,000), leukaemias (n=8000), and malignant mesotheliomas (n=7500). CONCLUSIONS A significant proportion of future cancers will result from occupational exposures. This estimate is lower than previous estimates in the literature; however, our estimate is not directly comparable to past estimates of the occupational cancer burden because they describe different quantities - future cancers in currently exposed versus current cancers due to past exposures. The results of this study allow us to determine which current occupational exposures are most important, and where to target exposure prevention.

Current and future risks of asbestos exposure in the Australian community

Background: Australia mined asbestos for more than 100 years and manufactured and imported asbestos products. There is a legacy of in situ asbestos throughout the built environment. Methods: The aim of this study was to identify the possible sources of current and future asbestos exposure from the built environment. Telephone interviews with environmental health officers, asbestos removalists, and asbestos assessors in Australia sought information about common asbestos scenarios encountered. Results: There is a considerable amount of asbestos remaining in situ in the Australian built environment. Potential current and future sources of asbestos exposure to the public are from asbestos-containing roofs and fences, unsafe asbestos removal practices, do-it-yourself home renovations and illegal dumping. Conclusion: This research has highlighted a need for consistent approaches in the regulation and enforcement of safe practices for the management and removal of asbestos to ensure that in situ asbestos in the built environment is managed appropriately.