Malignant mesothelioma is an uncommon but rapidly fatal disease for which the principal aetiological agent is exposure to asbestos. Mesothelioma is of particular significance in Australia where asbestos use was very widespread from the 1950s until the 1980s. Exposure to asbestos includes occupational exposure associated with working with asbestos or in workplaces where asbestos is used and also 'take-home' exposure of family members of asbestos exposed workers. Asbestos exposure may also be non-occupational, occurring as a consequence of using asbestos products in non-occupational contexts and passive exposure is also possible, such as exposure to asbestos products in the built environment or proximity to an environmental source of exposure, for example an asbestos production plant. The extremely long latency period for this disease makes exposure assessment problematic in the context of a mesothelioma registry. OccIDEAS, a recently developed online tool for retrospective exposure assessment, has been adapted for use in the Australian Mesothelioma Registry (AMR) to enable systematic retrospective exposure assessment of consenting cases. Twelve occupational questionnaire modules and one non-occupational module have been developed for the AMR, which form the basis of structured interviews using OccIDEAS, which also stores collected data and provides a framework for generating metrics of exposure.
Asbestos ; Australia ; Carcinogens ; Environmental Exposure ; Humans ; Latency Period (Psychology) ; Mesothelioma ; Occupational Exposure ; Plants ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Retrospective Studies

BACKGROUND: Occupational end users of pesticides may experience bodily absorption of the pesticide products they use, risking possible health effects. The purpose of this paper is to provide a guide for researchers, practitioners, and policy makers working in the field of agricultural health or other areas where occupational end use of pesticides and exposure issues are of interest. METHODS: This paper characterizes the health effects of pesticide exposure, jobs associated with pesticide use, pesticide-related tasks, absorption of pesticides through the skin, and the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) for reducing exposure. CONCLUSIONS: Although international and national efforts to reduce pesticide exposure through regulatory means should continue, it is difficult in the agricultural sector to implement engineering or system controls. It is clear that use of PPE does reduce dermal pesticide exposure but compliance among the majority of occupationally exposed pesticide end users appears to be poor. More research is needed on higher-order controls to reduce pesticide exposure and to understand the reasons for poor compliance with PPE and identify effective training methods.
Absorption ; Administrative Personnel ; Agricultural Workers' Diseases ; Compliance ; Humans ; Methods ; Occupational Exposure ; Occupations ; Pesticides* ; Protective Clothing ; Skin ; Skin Absorption

Background: Exposure to welding fume is associated with adverse effects on worker health. The use of various control measures can reduce levels of exposure and the resulting health effects. However, little is known about the factors that may influence workers' use of control measures in the workplace and their perceived intervention needs. This study aimed to investigate workers' and other stakeholders' views on ways to improve the use of welding fume control measures in Australian workplaces. Methods: We conducted a series of online focus group discussions and individual interviews with participants who have some occupational involvement in welding, whether as workers, employers or industry representatives, union representatives, or regulators. A semi-structured question guide was used, and all discussions and interviews were recorded and transcribed for analysis. Results: Five focus group discussions and five individual interviews were conducted with a total of 21 participants. Three major themes emerged. The first addressed the current awareness of welding fume harms and concern about exposure; the second focussed on the current use of control measures, and barriers and facilitators to their use; and the last centred around intervention needs and the contents of a potential effective intervention. Conclusion Improving the use of control measures to prevent exposure to welding fume requires knowledge around the barriers and facilitators of control, use, and the intervention needs of stakeholders. This study has provided such knowledge, which will facilitate the design and implementation of an intervention to reduce welding fume exposure and ultimately protect the health of workers.