Charles A. Mueller MS

Publications (2)3.25 Total impact

• Source

  Available from: Dick J J Heederik

  Article: Exposure to flour dust and sensitization among bakery employees

  MPH Elena H. Page MD, CIH Chad H. Dowell MS, Charles A. Mueller MS, PhD Raymond E. Biagini MS, PhD Dick Heederik MSc, Elena H. Page, Chad H. Dowell, Charles A. Mueller, Raymond E. Biagini, Dick Heederik
  [show abstract] [hide abstract]
  ABSTRACT: Background The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health conducted a study to determine prevalences of sensitization to bakery-associated antigens (BAAs) and work-related respiratory symptoms at a large commercial bakery.Methods The following measurements were carried out: personal breathing zone (PBZ) and general area (GA) monitoring for inhalable flour dust, α-amylase and wheat, a questionnaire, and blood tests for IgE specific to flour dust, wheat, α-amylase, and common aeroallergens.ResultsOf 186 bakery employees present during our site visit, 161completed the questionnaire and 96 allowed their blood to be drawn. The geometric mean PBZ and GA inhalable flour dust concentrations for the lower-exposure group was 0.235 mg/m3, and for the higher-exposure group was 3.01 mg/m3. Employees in the higher-exposure group had significantly higher prevalences of work-related wheezing, runny nose, stuffy nose, and frequent sneezing than the lower-exposure group. The prevalence of IgE specific to wheat was significantly higher among employees who ever had a job in the higher-exposure group or in production at another bakery at both the ≥ 0.10 kU/L and the ≥ 0.35 kU/L cutoffs, and to flour dust and α-amylase at the ≥ 0.10 kU/L cutoff, compared to the lower-exposure group.Conclusions Despite knowledge of the risks of exposure to flour being available for centuries, U.S. employees are still at risk of sensitization and respiratory symptoms from exposure to high levels of BAA. Am. J. Ind. Med. 53:1225–1232, 2010. © 2010 Wiley-Liss, Inc.
  American Journal of Industrial Medicine 11/2010; 53(12):1225 - 1232. · 1.63 Impact Factor
• Article: Work with video display terminals and the risk of reduced birthweight and preterm birth

  Barbara Grajewski PhD, Teresa M. Schnorr PhD, Jennita Reefhuis MS, Nel Roeleveld PhD, PhD Alberto Salvan MD, Charles A. Mueller MS, David L. Conover PhD, William E. Murray MS, Barbara Grajewski, Teresa M. Schnorr, Jennita Reefhuis, Nel Roeleveld, Alberto Salvan, Charles A. Mueller, David L. Conover, William E. Murray
  [show abstract] [hide abstract]
  ABSTRACT: To determine whether the use of video display terminals (VDTs) is associated with an increased risk of reduced birthweight (RBW) and preterm birth, a cohort of telephone operators who used VDTs at work was compared to a cohort of non-VDT-users. Among 2,430 women interviewed, 713 eligible singleton live births were reported. Exposure was estimated from company records and a representative sample of electromagnetic fields was measured at the VDT workstations. For RBW (≤2,800 g), we found no excess risk associated with any VDT use during pregnancy (odds ratio [OR] = 0.9; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.5–1.7). For preterm birth (≤37 weeks), we similarly found no excess risk (OR = 0.7; 95%CI = 0.4–1.1). The risks estimated did not change substantially when hours working with VDTs were used as exposure variables. By contrast, increased risks were found for several known risk factors for LBW and preterm birth. We conclude that occupational VDT use does not increase the risk of RBW and preterm birth. Am. J. Ind. Med. 32:681–688, 1997. Published 1997 Wiley-Liss, Inc.†
  American Journal of Industrial Medicine 11/1997; 32(6):681 - 688. · 1.63 Impact Factor