HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS REGISTER		Author Keyword(s) Vol Page [Advanced]

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: oem.2007.035303v1 65/6/404    most recent Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this link to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Add article to my folders Download to citation manager Request Permissions Google Scholar Articles by Morgan, O Articles by Reacher, M PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Morgan, O Articles by Reacher, M

Exposures and reported symptoms associated with occupational deployment to the Buncefield fuel depot fire, England 2005

¹ East of England Regional Epidemiology Unit, Health Protection Agency, Cambridge, UK
² Centre for Infections, Health Protection Agency, Cambridge, UK
³ Hertfordshire Constabulary, UK
⁴ Hertfordshire Fire and Rescue Service, UK
⁵ Hertfordshire County Council, UK
⁶ Dacorum Primary Care Trust, Hertfordshire, UK
⁷ Luton and Dunstable Hospital NHS Trust, Luton, Bedfordshire
⁸ Health and Safety Executive, London, UK

Correspondence to:
Dr Oliver Morgan, Health Protection Agency, East of England Regional Epidemiology Unit, Institute of Public Health, University Forvie Site, Robinson Way, Cambridge CB2 0SR, UK; omorgan{at}bigfoot.com

Objectives: An explosion at the Buncefield fuel depot outside London occurred on 11 December 2005. We conducted a retrospective cohort study of airborne exposures and health status for workers deployed.

Methods: Deployed individuals were identified through their occupational health departments. We sent a self-completion questionnaire asking about health symptoms during the burn and post-burn phases. The prevalence of health symptoms in workers was compared to symptoms in local residents not under the smoke plume.

Results: Of 1949 eligible individuals, 815 returned questionnaires (response rate 44%). Respiratory protection was used by 39%. Symptoms were reported by 41% of individuals during the burn phase compared with 26% in the post-burn phase. In a final multivariable model, reporting of any symptoms was associated with deployment inside the inner fire cordon during the burn phase (OR 2.07, 95% CI 1.24 to 3.47) and wearing a face mask (OR 2.33, 95% CI 1.67 to 3.26). Compared with the general public, eye irritation (prevalence ratio (PR) 2.1, 95% CI 1.5 to 3.0), coughing (PR 1.3, 95% CI 1.0 to 1.8) and headaches (PR 1.7, 95% CI 1.2 to 2.5) were more common in workers deployed during the burn phase but not the post-burn phase.

Conclusions: Increased reporting of symptoms close to the fire during the burn phase was consistent with increased exposure to products of combustion, although no major acute illness was reported. That only a minority of individuals used face masks, which were not protective for symptoms, raises questions about the availability of adequate respiratory protection for such incidents.