Environmental tobacco smoke exposure, respiratory and cardiovascular health in restaurant and bar workers in Mexico

Environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) is a well established health hazard, being causally associated to lung cancer and cardiovascular disease. ETS regulations have been developed worldwide to reduce or eliminate exposure in most public places. Restaurants and bars constitute an exception. Restaurants and bar workers experience the highest ETS exposure levels across several occupations, with correspondingly increased health risks. In Mexico, previous exposure assessment in restaurants and bars showed concentrations in bars and restaurants to be the highest across different public and workplaces. Recently, Mexico developed at the federal level the General Law for Tobacco Control restricting indoors smoking to separated areas. AT the local level Mexico City developed the Law for the Protection of Non-smokers Health, completely banning smoking in restaurants and bars. Studies to assess ETS exposure in restaurants and bars, along with potential health effects were required to evaluate the impact of these legislative changes and to set a baseline measurement for future evaluations.^ A large cross-sectional study conducted in restaurants and bars from four Mexican cities was conducted from July to October 2008, to evaluate the following aims: Aim 1) Explore the potential impact of the Mexico City ban on ETS concentrations through comparison of Mexico City with other cities. Aim 2). Explore the association between ETS exposure, respiratory function indicators and respiratory symptoms. Aim 3). Explore the association between ETS exposure and blood pressure and heart rate.^ Three cities with no smoking ban were selected: Colima (11.5% smoking prevalence), Cuernavaca (21.5% smoking prevalence) and Toluca (27.8% smoking prevalence). Mexico City (27.9% smoking prevalence), the only city with a ban at the time of the study, was also selected. Restaurants and bars were randomly selected from municipal records. A goal of 26 restaurants and 26 bars per city was set, 50% of them under 100 m2. Each establishment was visited during the highest occupancy shift, and managers and workers answered to a questionnaire. Vapor-phase nicotine was measured using passive monitors, that were activated at the beginning and deactivated at the end of the shift. Also, workers participated at the beginning and end of the shift in a short physical evaluation, comprising the measurement of Forced Expiratory Volume in the first second (FEV1) and Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF), as well as blood pressure and heart rate.^ A total of 371 establishments were invited, 219 agreed to participate for a 60.1% participation rate. In them, 828 workers were invited, 633 agreed to participate for a 76% participation rate. Mexico City had at least 4 times less nicotine compared to any of the other cities. Differences between Mexico City and other cities were not explained by establishment characteristics, such as ventilation or air extraction. However, differences between cities disappeared when ban mechanisms, such as policy towards costumer's smoking, were considered in the models. An association between ETS exposure and respiratory symptoms (cough OR=1.27, 95%CI=1.04, 1.55) and respiratory illness (asthma OR=1.97, 95%CI=1.20, 3.24; respiratory illness OR=1.79, 95%CI=1.10, 2.94) was observed. No association between ETS and phlegm, wheezing or respiratory infections was observed. No association between ETS and any of the spirometric indicators was observed. An association between ETS exposure and increased systolic and diastolic blood pressure at the end of the shift was observed among non-smokers (systolic blood pressure beta=1.51, 95%CI=0.44, 2.58; diastolic blood pressure beta=1.50, 95%CI=0.72, 2.28). The opposite effect was observed in heavy smokers, were increased ETS exposure was associated with lower blood pressure at the end of the shift (systolic blood pressure beta=1.90, 95%CI=-3.57, -0.23; diastolic blood pressure beta=-1.46, 95%CI=-2.72, -0.02). No association in light smokers was observed. No association for heart rate was observed. ^ Results from this dissertation suggest Mexico City's smoking ban has had a larger impact on ETS exposure. Ventilation or air extraction, mechanisms of ETS control suggested frequently by tobacco companies to avoid smoking bans were not associated with ETS exposure. This dissertation suggests ETS exposure could be linked to changes in blood pressure and to increased respiratory symptoms. Evidence derived from this dissertation points to the potential negative health effects of ETS exposure in restaurants and bars, and provides support for the development of total smoking bans in this economic sector. ^

Prevalence and risk factors of asthma and work -related asthma among U.S. adults: Data from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 1988--1994

This cross-sectional analysis of the data from the Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey was conducted to determine the prevalence and determinants of asthma and wheezing among US adults, and to identify the occupations and industries at high risk of developing work-related asthma and work-related wheezing. Separate logistic models were developed for physician-diagnosed asthma (MD asthma), wheezing in the previous 12 months (wheezing), work-related asthma and work-related wheezing. Major risk factors including demographic, socioeconomic, indoor air quality, allergy, and other characteristics were analyzed. The prevalence of lifetime MD asthma was 7.7% and the prevalence of wheezing was 17.2%. Mexican-Americans exhibited the lowest prevalence of MD asthma (4.8%; 95% confidence interval (CI): 4.2, 5.4) when compared to other race-ethnic groups. The prevalence of MD asthma or wheezing did not vary by gender. Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that Mexican-Americans were less likely to develop MD asthma (adjusted odds ratio (ORa) = 0.64, 95%CI: 0.45, 0.90) and wheezing (ORa = 0.55, 95%CI: 0.44, 0.69) when compared to non-Hispanic whites. Low education level, current and past smoking status, pet ownership, lifetime diagnosis of physician-diagnosed hay fever and obesity were all significantly associated with MD asthma and wheezing. No significant effect of indoor air pollutants on asthma and wheezing was observed in this study. The prevalence of work-related asthma was 3.70% (95%CI: 2.88, 4.52) and the prevalence of work-related wheezing was 11.46% (95%CI: 9.87, 13.05). The major occupations identified at risk of developing work-related asthma and wheezing were cleaners; farm and agriculture related occupations; entertainment related occupations; protective service occupations; construction; mechanics and repairers; textile; fabricators and assemblers; other transportation and material moving occupations; freight, stock and material movers; motor vehicle operators; and equipment cleaners. The population attributable risk for work-related asthma and wheeze were 26% and 27% respectively. The major industries identified at risk of work-related asthma and wheeze include entertainment related industry; agriculture, forestry and fishing; construction; electrical machinery; repair services; and lodging places. The population attributable risk for work-related asthma was 36.5% and work-related wheezing was 28.5% for industries. Asthma remains an important public health issue in the US and in the other regions of the world. ^