Top

Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2011 | Research

The agreement between workers and within workers in regard to occupational exposure to mercury in dental practice assessed from a questionnaire and an interview

Authors: Kristin Svendsen, Bjørn Hilt

Published in: Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology | Issue 1/2011

Abstract

Background

The correct assessment and classification of exposure is essential in epidemiology. The validity of exposure data obtained by the use of questionnaires is, however, seldom evaluated. When conducting a study on the possible health effects from mercury exposure in dental practice, we compared answers on exposure from a job-specific questionnaire with answers to the same questions given at an interview 6 to 18 months later.

Methods

We examined the concordance between workers by comparing answers to the questionnaire given by persons working in the same clinics during the same time spans and the agreement within workers by comparing answers to the same questions from a questionnaire and from an interview. Other aims were to see if there was a difference in the answers to the questionnaire across job titles and to study the impact of missing information on the response rate in a detailed questionnaire.

Results

There was a marked difference between the pairs of employees working in the same clinic regarding the start and termination years for the different preparation methods, and this was partly independent of their occupation. Kappa values for using different preparation methods in the questionnaire and at the interview varied between 0.41(moderate) to 0.88(very good).

Conclusions

The results of this study indicate that a mailed questionnaire will cause misclassification of exposure. The observed occurrence of false positive exposure classifications from the questionnaire compared to the interview was higher than for false negative. This is important and may result in serious bias if the prevalence of exposure is low. Due to missing information, detailed questionnaires may also be inefficient if the goal is to construct exposure measures from combinations of several answers in the questionnaire.

Kauppinen T: Assessment of exposure in occupational epidemiology. Scand J Work Environ Health 1994, 20(special issue):19–29.PubMed

Flegal K, Brownie C, Haas JD: The effects of exposure misclassification on estimates of relative risk. Am J Epidemiol 1986, 123(4):736–751.PubMed

Tielemans E, Heederik D, Burdof A, Vermeulen R, Vermeulen H, Kromhout H, Hartog K: Assessment of occupational exposures in a general population: comparison of different methods. Occup Environ Med 1999, 56: 45–51. 10.1136/oem.56.3.145CrossRef

Holmes E, Garschick E: The reproducibility of the self-report of occupational exposure to asbestos and dust. J Occup Med 1991, 33(2):134–138.PubMed

Hilt B, Langård S, Andersen A, Rosenberg J: Asbestos exposure, smoking habits, and cancer incidence among production and maintenance workers in an electrochemical plant. Am J Ind Med 1985, 8(6):565–77. 10.1002/ajim.4700080608CrossRefPubMed

Ahlborg GA: Validity of exposure data obtained by questionnaire. Two examples from occupational reproductive studies. Scand J Work Environ Health 1990, 16: 284–288.CrossRefPubMed

Teschke K, Olshan AF, Daniels JL, De Roos AJ, Parks CG, Schulz M, Vaughan TL, Kromhout H: Occupational exposure assessment in case-control studies: opportunities for improvement. Occup Environ Med 2002, 59: 575–594. 10.1136/oem.59.9.575PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

Svendsen K, Syversen T, Melø I, Hilt B: Historical exposure to mercury in Norwegian dental personnel. Scand J Work Environ Health 2010, 36(3):231–41.CrossRefPubMed

Hilt B, Svendsen K, Syversen T, Aas O, Qvenild T, Sletvold H, Melø I: Occurrence of cognitive symptoms in dental assistants with previous occupational exposure to metallic mercury. NeuroToxicology 2009, 30: 1202–6. 10.1016/j.neuro.2009.04.012CrossRefPubMed

10.

Altman DG: Practical Statistics for Medical Research. Chapman & Hall, London UK; 1991.

11.

Fritchi L, Siemiatycki J, Richardson L: Self-assessed versus expert-assessed occupational exposures. Am J Epidemiol 1996, 144: 521–527.CrossRef

12.

Hobson AJ, Sterling DA, Emo B, Evanoff BA, Sterling CS, Good L, Seixas N, Checkoway H, Racette BA: Validity and reliability of an occupational exposure questionnaire for parkinsonism in welders. J Occup Environ Hyg 2009, 6(6):324–31. 10.1080/15459620902836856PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed

Title: The agreement between workers and within workers in regard to occupational exposure to mercury in dental practice assessed from a questionnaire and an interview
Authors: Kristin Svendsen
Bjørn Hilt
Publication date: 01-12-2011
Publisher: BioMed Central
Published in: Journal of Occupational Medicine and Toxicology / Issue 1/2011
Electronic ISSN: 1745-6673
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/1745-6673-6-8

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

The agreement between workers and within workers in regard to occupational exposure to mercury in dental practice assessed from a questionnaire and an interview

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2011

Musculoskeletal disorders early diagnosis: A retrospective study in the occupational medicine setting

Reduced inclination of cervical spine in a novel notebook screen system - implications for rehabilitation

Tobacco smoke particles and indoor air quality (ToPIQ) - the protocol of a new study

Is dental amalgam safe for humans? The opinion of the scientific committee of the European Commission

Negligible heat strain in armored vehicle officers wearing personal body armor

Methods to recognize work-related cancer in workplaces, the general population, and by experts in the clinic, a Norwegian experience