Journal Articles

Permanent URI for this collectionhttps://mro.massey.ac.nz/handle/10179/7915

Browse

Filters

20171

Settings

Author: search.filters.author.'t Mannetje AHas files: No

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Recall of mobile phone usage and laterality in young people: The multinational Mobi-Expo study.
    (Elsevier B.V., 26/04/2018) Goedhart G; van Wel L; Langer CE; de Llobet Viladoms P; Wiart J; Hours M; Kromhout H; Benke G; Bouka E; Bruchim R; Choi K-H; Eng A; Ha M; Huss A; Kiyohara K; Kojimahara N; Krewski D; Lacour B; 't Mannetje A; Maule M; Migliore E; Mohipp C; Momoli F; Petridou ET; Radon K; Remen T; Sadetzki S; Sim M; Weinmann T; Cardis E; Vrijheid M; Vermeulen R
    OBJECTIVE: To study recall of mobile phone usage, including laterality and hands-free use, in young people. METHODS: Actual mobile phone use was recorded among volunteers aged between 10 and 24 years from 12 countries by the software application XMobiSense and was compared with self-reported mobile phone use at 6 and 18 months after using the application. The application recorded number and duration of voice calls, number of text messages, amount of data transfer, laterality (% of call time the phone was near the right or left side of the head, or neither), and hands-free usage. After data cleaning, 466 participants were available for the main analyses (recorded vs. self-reported phone use after 6 months). RESULTS: Participants were on average 18.6 years old (IQR 15.2-21.8 years). The Spearman correlation coefficients between recorded and self-reported (after 6 months) number and duration of voice calls were 0.68 and 0.65, respectively. Number of calls was on average underestimated by the participants (adjusted geometric mean ratio (GMR) self-report/recorded = 0.52, 95% CI = 0.47-0.58), while duration of calls was overestimated (GMR=1.32, 95%, CI = 1.15-1.52). The ratios significantly differed by country, age, maternal educational level, and level of reported phone use, but not by time of the interview (6 vs. 18 months). Individuals who reported low mobile phone use underestimated their use, while individuals who reported the highest level of phone use were more likely to overestimate their use. Individuals who reported using the phone mainly on the right side of the head used it more on the right (71.1%) than the left (28.9%) side. Self-reported left side users, however, used the phone only slightly more on the left (53.3%) than the right (46.7%) side. Recorded percentage hands-free use (headset, speaker mode, Bluetooth) increased with increasing self-reported frequency of hands-free device usage. Frequent (≥50% of call time) reported headset or speaker mode use corresponded with 17.1% and 17.2% of total call time, respectively, that was recorded as hands-free use. DISCUSSION: These results indicate that young people can recall phone use moderately well, with recall depending on the amount of phone use and participants' characteristics. The obtained information can be used to calibrate self-reported mobile use to improve estimation of radiofrequency exposure from mobile phones.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Wood Dust in Joineries and Furniture Manufacturing: An Exposure Determinant and Intervention Study.
    (1/05/2017) Douwes J; Cheung K; Prezant B; Sharp M; Corbin M; McLean D; 't Mannetje A; Schlunssen V; Sigsgaard T; Kromhout H; LaMontagne AD; Pearce N; McGlothlin JD
    OBJECTIVES: To assess wood dust exposures and determinants in joineries and furniture manufacturing and to evaluate the efficacy of specific interventions on dust emissions under laboratory conditions. Also, in a subsequent follow-up study in a small sample of joinery workshops, we aimed to develop, implement, and evaluate a cost-effective and practicable intervention to reduce dust exposures. METHODS: Personal inhalable dust (n = 201) was measured in 99 workers from 10 joineries and 3 furniture-making factories. To assess exposure determinants, full-shift video exposure monitoring (VEM) was conducted in 19 workers and task-based VEM in 32 workers (in 7 joineries and 3 furniture factories). We assessed the efficacy of vacuum extraction on hand tools and the use of vacuum cleaners instead of sweeping and dry wiping under laboratory conditions. These measures were subsequently implemented in three joinery workshops with 'high' (>4 mg m-3) and one with 'low' (<2 mg m-3) baseline exposures. We also included two control workshops (one 'low' and one 'high' exposure workshop) in which no interventions were implemented. Exposures were measured 4 months prior and 4 months following the intervention. RESULTS: Average (geometric means) exposures in joinery and furniture making were 2.5 mg m-3 [geometric standard deviations (GSD) 2.5] and 0.6 mg m-3 (GSD 2.3), respectively. In joinery workers cleaning was associated with a 3.0-fold higher (P < 0.001) dust concentration compared to low exposure tasks (e.g. gluing), while the use of hand tools showed 3.0- to 11.0-fold higher (P < 0.001) exposures. In furniture makers, we found a 5.4-fold higher exposure (P < 0.001) with using a table/circular saw. Laboratory efficiency experiments showed a 10-fold decrease in exposure (P < 0.001) when using a vacuum cleaner. Vacuum extraction on hand tools combined with a downdraft table reduced exposures by 42.5% for routing (P < 0.1) and 85.5% for orbital sanding (P < 0.001). Following intervention measures in joineries, a borderline statistically significant (P < 0.10) reduction in exposure of 30% was found in workshops with 'high' baseline exposures, but no reduction was shown in the workshop with 'low' baseline exposures. CONCLUSIONS: Wood dust exposure is high in joinery workers and (to a lesser extent) furniture makers with frequent use of hand tools and cleaning being key drivers of exposure. Vacuum extraction on hand tools and alternative cleaning methods reduced workplace exposures substantially, but may be insufficient to achieve compliance with current occupational exposure limits.