You are here

Article Text

Article menu
Download PDFPDF
Cochrane corner
Workplace interventions for treatment of occupational asthma: a Cochrane systematic review
  1. G J de Groene,
  2. T M Pal,
  3. J Beach,
  4. S M Tarlo,
  5. D Spreeuwers,
  6. M H W Frings-Dresen,
  7. S Mattioli,
  8. J H Verbeek
  1. Netherlands Center of Occupational Diseases, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  1. Correspondence to G J de Groene, Netherlands Center of Occupational Diseases, Academic Medical Center, PO Box 22660, 1100 DD Amsterdam, The Netherlands; g.j.degroene{at}amc.nl

https://doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2011-100399

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    Introduction

    Occupational asthma is the most frequently reported work-related respiratory disease in many countries. It is defined as asthma that is caused by a specific workplace exposure to certain substances and not to factors outside the workplace. In a recent review, the population attributable risk for adult onset asthma being caused by occupational exposures was 17.6%. Occupational asthma can lead to decreased quality of life, sickness absence and increased costs for the patient, the employer and society. Common causes of occupational asthma include exposure to high molecular weight (HMW) agents such as wheat, latex and animal proteins, or to low molecular weight (LMW) agents such as di-isocyanates, acid anhydrides, platinum salts and plicatic acid. There are no systematic reviews of controlled studies of workplace interventions for occupational asthma. Therefore, we conducted a Cochrane systematic review to evaluate the effectiveness of workplace interventions on the outcome of occupational asthma.1

    Methods

    We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, NIOSHTIC-2, CISDOC and HSELINE up to February 2011.

    We intended to include randomised controlled trials, controlled before and …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • This paper is based on a Cochrane Review published in The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 51 (see http://www.thecochranelibrary.com for information). Cochrane Reviews are regularly updated as new evidence emerges and in response to feedback, and The Cochrane Library should be consulted for the most recent version of the review.

    • Competing interests None.

    • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.