Stefan Kleinbeck

Sensory and pulmonary effects of acute exposure to sulfur dioxide (SO2)

BACKGROUND Exposure to sulfur dioxide (SO(2)) affects large populations worldwide. Pulmonary effects have been reported at concentrations relevant in the general (<0.5 ppm) and working environment (>0.5 ppm). SO(2) is an irritant but the existing studies often emphasize only pulmonary effects and no clear dose-response relationship has yet been described. OBJECTIVES Using a multi-level, multi-method approach, odor annoyance, sensory irritation and pulmonary effects of SO(2) were to be investigated in an experimental exposure study. METHODS Eye blink frequency, rhinomanometry, spirometry and symptom ratings of acute health effects were assessed before, during, and after the exposures. Each session lasted 4h and concentrations of 0.5, 1, and 2 ppm were investigated and compared to a control condition using clean air. Sixteen human volunteers (8 females/8 males) participated and during exposure light physical exercise was simulated with bicycle ergometry. RESULTS Eye blink frequency, nasal airflow, and lung function were not affected by the acute SO(2) exposure investigated. These physiological responses to moderate SO(2) exposures were not significantly affected by gender. Regarding subjectively measured chemosensory sensations, only odor annoyance ratings increased in a dose-dependent manner, but the average magnitudes were labeled weak to moderate. CONCLUSIONS In healthy volunteers, without hyperresponsiveness to SO(2), no dose-dependent effects of acute SO(2) exposures up to 2 ppm could be measured. Due to olfactory perceptions subjects were aware of the different SO(2) exposures but the associated annoyance was relatively low.

Neurobehavioral effects during exposures to propionic acid--an indicator of chemosensory distraction?

The chemosensory effects of propionic acid (PA) in humans have not been conclusively studied and there is no established occupational exposure limit (OEL) in Germany. In addition to sensory irritation caused by PA, it was hypothesized that the annoying odor of PA might interfere with the performance results. There were 23 consenting healthy participants (12 female, 11 male) in the group studied. They were exposed for 4 h to PA in concentrations of 0.3, 5 and 10 ppm in a cross-over design. During these exposures, performance was recorded with four cognitive tests measuring response-inhibition, working memory, set-shifting, and divided attention. Odor annoyance, other chemosensory sensations, and acute symptoms were assessed before, during, and after exposure with standardized rating scales. Moderate odor annoyance and weak sensory irritation were reported during 5 and 10 ppm exposure conditions. The different levels of exposure to PA had no impact upon the results of three out of the four behavioral tests. The difficulties of the task were reflected in the results. However in the fourth, which was the response-inhibition task, there was significant increase in the error rates which corresponded to the exposure levels. Results from previous experiments suggested high odor annoyance at the investigated concentrations. Our findings showed that odor annoyance and reported sensory irritations were low. In conclusion, the hypothesis of a distractive effect due to the malodor of PA could not be confirmed. Only in concentrations as high as 10 ppm acute PA exposure affected the response accuracy of one of the four neurobehavioral task. For other more annoying substances, a neurobehavioral effect influenced by an indirect mechanism of resources competition is still conceivable.

Stress lowers the detection threshold for foul-smelling 2-mercaptoethanol.

Abstract Previous studies have reported enhanced vigilance for threat-related information in response to acute stress. While it is known that acute stress modulates sensory systems in humans, its impact on olfaction and the olfactory detection of potential threats is less clear. Two psychophysical experiments examined, if acute stress lowers the detection threshold for foul-smelling 2-mercaptoethanol. Participants in Experiment 1 (N = 30) and Experiment 2 (N = 32) were randomly allocated to a control group or a stress group. Participants in the stress group underwent a purely psychosocial stressor (public mental arithmetic) in Experiment 1 and a stressor that combined a physically demanding task with social-evaluative threat in Experiment 2 (socially evaluated cold-pressor test). In both experiments, olfactory detection thresholds were repeatedly assessed by means of dynamic dilution olfactometry. Each threshold measurement consisted of three trials conducted using an ascending method of limits. Participants in the stress groups showed the expected changes in heart rate, salivary cortisol, and mood measures in response to stress. About 20 min after the stressor, participants in the stress groups could detect 2-mercaptoethanol at a lower concentration than participants in the corresponding control groups. Our results show that acute stress lowers the detection threshold for a malodor.

Neurobehavioral effects of exposure to propionic acid revisited-Does psychosocial stress interfere with distractive effects in volunteers?

Local irritants stimulate the nervous system via chemosensory pathways that trigger cognitive distraction, subjective complaints about impaired health, and physiological defense reflexes (e.g. eye-blinks). At workplaces and in the environment chemical exposures often co-occur with psychosocial stress. This study investigated if stress modulates adverse effects of exposure to the local irritant and malodorant propionic acid (PA). Forty-eight participants were randomly assigned to an experimental (false negative feedback+salient surveillance) or control group. In a cross-over design, both groups were exposed for 4h to PA in concentrations of 0.3 and 0-20ppm (time-weighted average=10ppm). In the experimental group, the stress protocol induced moderate psychosocial stress as indicated by salivary cortisol and subjective responses. Despite concentration-dependent increases in chemosensory perceptions and symptoms, the level of exposure to PA had no impact upon the results of four out of six neurobehavioral tests. In the sustained attention test, there was a significant increase in error rates that corresponded to the exposure levels. However, a concentration-dependent impairment of spatial working memory and an adverse increase in eye-blink frequency were restricted to the control group. Stressed participants had shorter simple reaction times and high eye-blink frequency irrespective of exposure suggesting enhanced alertness. Psychosocial stress increased complaints, ocular irritation and unspecific symptoms at the end of the 0.3ppm exposure to a level that was comparable with that in the control group during exposure to 0-20ppm. Results indicate that the adverse effects of a local irritant and psychosocial stress are non-additive.

Odor Thresholds and Breathing Changes of Human Volunteers as Consequences of Sulphur Dioxide Exposure Considering Individual Factors

Objectives Though sulfur dioxide (SO2) is used widely at workplaces, itseffects on humans are not known. Thresholds are reported without reference to gender or age and occupational exposure limits are basedon effects on lung functioning,although localized effects in the upper airways can be expected.This studys aim is to determine thresholds with respect to age and gender and suggests a new approach to risk assessment using breathing reflexes presumably triggered by trigeminal receptors in the upper airways. Methods Odor thresholds were determined by the ascending method of limits in groups stratified by age and gender.Subjects rated intensities of different olfactory and trigeminal perceptions at different concentrations of SO2. During the presentation of the concentrations, breathing movements were measured by respiratory inductive plethysmography. Results Neither age nor gender effects were observed for odor threshold. Only ratings of nasal irritation were influenced bygender. A benchmark dose analysis on relative respiratory depth revealed a 10%-deviation from baseline at about 25.27 mg/m3. Conclusion The proposed new approach to risk assessment appearsto be sustainable. We discuss whether a 10%-deviation of breathingdepth is relevant.

Interindividual differences in chemosensory perception: Toward a better understanding of perceptual ratings during chemical exposures

ABSTRACT Perceptions that arise from stimulation of olfactory and trigeminal receptors in the nasal cavity guide the evaluation of chemical environment in humans. Strong interindividual differences in these assessments may be attributed to nonsensory factors such as gender, anxiety, and chemical sensitivity. Knowledge regarding the influence of these factors originates mainly from basic odor research using short-term exposure scenarios. In situations with continuous chemical exposures—common in the working environment—their impact is less clear. To investigate their role during the exposure to workplace chemicals, 4-hour experimental exposure studies (total N = 105) using nine different airborne chemicals were summarized. In each study, subjects evaluated a single chemical in a controlled environment by rating five chemosensory perceptions, including odor intensity, disgust, annoyance, pungency, and burning, several times during occupational limit and low exposures. It was investigated whether the effects of trait-like modulators, such as anxiety and self-reported chemical sensitivity, depend on exposure-related factors and gender. Trait-like modulators markedly affected ratings by women, but not men. Highly anxious women reported more intense annoyance and disgust than less anxious women. Stronger self-reported chemical sensitivity was associated with increased ratings of pungency and burning in women exposed to occupational limit concentrations. This study demonstrates that a complex interplay of exposure-related factors, gender, and trait-like individual differences affects perceptual ratings during continuous chemical exposure. It seems necessary to incorporate the assessment of specific as well as general trait-like modulators into future experimental exposure studies.

Does seasonal allergic rhinitis increase sensitivity to ammonia exposure

Allergic inflammation in the upper airways represents a wide-spread health issue: Little is known about whether it increases sensitivity to airborne chemicals thereby challenging established exposure limits that neglect such differences in susceptibility. To investigate the role of pre-existing allergic inflammation, 19 subjects with seasonal allergic rhinitis (SAR) and 18 control subjects with low risk of sensitization were exposed for 4h to ammonia in two concentrations (cross-over design): 2.5ppm (odor threshold) and 0-40ppm (occupational exposure limit: 20ppm TWA). Prior to the whole-body exposure, it was confirmed that subjects with SAR showed persistent inflammation outside the pollen season as indicated by increased exhaled nitric oxide and total immunoglobulin E in serum compared to controls. Despite concentration-dependent increases in chemosensory perceptions and acute symptoms, SAR status did not modulate subjective effects of exposure. Moreover, SAR status did not affect the investigated physiological endpoints of sensory irritation: While eye-blink recordings confirmed weak ocular irritation properties of ammonia at 0-40ppm, this effect was not enhanced in SAR subjects compared to controls. Irrespective of SAR status, exposure to 0-40ppm ammonia did not result in a cortisol stress response, objective nasal obstruction as measured with anterior active rhinomanometry, or an inflammatory response as indexed by substance P, tumor-necrosis-factor α, and high-mobility-group protein 1 in nasal lavage fluid. At least for the malodorous compound ammonia, these results do not support the hypothesis that SAR enhances chemosensory effects in response to local irritants. Before generalizing this finding, more compounds as well as sensitization to perennial allergens need to be investigated.