Chest ACCP Member Benefits
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Guest Access | Sign In via User Name/Password
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF) Free
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Article Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Allard, C
Right arrow Articles by Malo, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Allard, C
Right arrow Articles by Malo, J.

Chest, Vol 96, 1046-1049, Copyright © 1989 by American College of Chest Physicians

ARTICLES

Occupational asthma due to various agents. Absence of clinical and functional improvement at an interval of four or more years after cessation of exposure

C Allard, A Cartier, H Ghezzo and JL Malo
Department of Chest Medicine, Hopital du Sacre-Coeur, Montreal, Canada.

We have previously shown that in some subjects with occupational asthma caused by various agents, there is no improvement approximately two years after exposure ended. These results could be explained by the short interval between diagnosis and follow-up. In the current study, we saw 28 subjects with occupational asthma at two intervals, 2.3 years (range, three months to 5.7 years) and 5.8 years (range, 4.3 to 10.9 years) after the cessation of exposure. Various causes of occupational asthma were included. The diagnosis was confirmed in 26 of the cases by specific inhalation challenges in the laboratory, and in the remaining two cases by combined monitoring of peak expiratory flow rates and bronchial responsiveness. All subjects had symptoms of asthma at both follow-up assessments. There were no changes in the need for medication, spirometry, or bronchial hyperresponsiveness. Depending on the interval of the follow-up, four to six subjects required inhaled steroid agents in addition to the usual bronchodilators, 11 had FEV1 less than 80 percent of predicted, and 26 or 27 had an abnormal PC 20 histamine. Only two subjects demonstrated sustained improvement in PC 20 at the first and second follow-ups, and one other showed changes during the second follow-up assessment which were not present at the first. We conclude that except for three subjects, the need for medication did not diminish, nor did airway obstruction and hyperresponsiveness improve in this group of subjects with occupational asthma long after exposure ended. These results differ from other studies, which demonstrated that some recovery takes place in a greater proportion of individuals.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Occup. Environ. Med.Home page
P J Nicholson, P Cullinan, A J Newman Taylor, P S Burge, and C Boyle
Evidence based guidelines for the prevention, identification, and management of occupational asthma
Occup. Environ. Med., May 1, 2005; 62(5): 290 - 299.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 ChestHome page
G. Moscato, A. Dellabianca, L. Perfetti, B. Brame, E. Galdi, R. Niniano, and P. Paggiaro
Occupational Asthma: A Longitudinal Study on the Clinical and Socioeconomic Outcome After Diagnosis
Chest, January 1, 1999; 115(1): 249 - 256.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1989 by the American College of Chest Physicians.