pft in cement workers

1. Study of Pulmonary Function in Cement Factory workers (Diamond Cement Company, Madora, Jhansi) Presented By : Dr. Awadhesh kumar sharma Department of Medicine M.L.B. Medical College, Jhansi

2. INTRODUCTION Occupational lung disease are those conditions for which environmental or occupational causes are suspected. This assessment is important because removal of the patient from harmful exposure is often the only intervention that might prevent further significant deterioration or lead to improvement in patients condition.

3. In a study, population over age 15, 15-20% of burden of Asthma and COPD has been estimated to be due to occupational factors. In cement factory workers, they are exposed to particles like silica, Mg, Zn, Al. These particles are of 2.5-10  m range and mostly deposited relatively high in the tracheo Bronchial tree.

5. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES To evaluate the effect of cement exposure on ventilatory function of workers in Diamond cement factory at Madora, Jhansi.

8. MATERIAL AND METHODS The present study is carried out in department of Medicine M.L.B. Medical College, Jhansi, to evaluate the effect of cement exposure among cement factory workers. For this study workers of cement factory were taken as subjects and normal healthy attendants of patients were taken as control. 136 cement factory workers were selected randomly and enrolled.

12. All the subjects underwent extensive clinical and physical examination. STUDY GROUP 30 workers were excluded because of there <10 years duration of work in cement factory and 6 were excluded because there age was > 60 years. So the final study group constitute 100 workers. Among the 100 workers 60 were non smokers and 40 were smokers.

13. STUDY GROUP CONTROL GROUP 100 50 Smoker Non Smoker 60 40

14. After all inclusion / Exclusion criteria the final study group constituted – Study group Group A Smokers (40) Group B Non Smokers(60) Control group 50

15. OBSERVATION Change in FVC as per study group of cases When mean values of FVC were compared individually with mean value of control (4.2±0.06), a highly significant (p<0.001) decline in group A and significant decline in group B (p<0.01) were seen in both groups as compared to control group. Smokers Non smokers 3 3.5 4.2

16. When mean values of FEV 1 were compared individually with mean value of control (3.42±0.32), a insignificant decline (p>0.05) were seen in both groups as compared to control group. Change in FEV 1 (litre) as per age group Smokers Non smokers 2.2 2.5 3.42

17. When mean values of FEV 1 /FVC were compared individually with mean value of control (83.36±0.16), a insignificant decline (p>0.05) were seen in both groups as compared to control group. Changes in FEV 1 / FVC (% ) as per study group Smokers Non smokers 86 90 83.3

18. When mean values of PEFR were compared individually with mean value of control (7.90±0.30), a significant decline (p<0.01) were seen in both groups as compared to control group. Changes in PEFR (litre/sec) as per study group Smokers Non smokers 4.89 5.06 7.9

19. When mean values of FEF25%-75% were compared individually with mean value of control (3.21±0.062), a significant decline (p<0.01) were seen in both groups as compared to control group. Changes in FEF25%-75% (litre/sec) as per study group Smokers Non smokers 2.1 2.42 3.21

24. THANK YOU