World Trade Center response activities and cognitive health: A moderated mediation study of the role of surgical/nuisance dust mask usage

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q2 NEUROSCIENCES
Yuan Yang , Jaymie Meliker , Lauren L. Richmond , Frank D. Mann , Minos Kritikos , Dylan M. Smith , Tesleem Babalola , Melissa A. Carr , Benjamin J. Luft , Sean A.P. Clouston
{"title":"World Trade Center response activities and cognitive health: A moderated mediation study of the role of surgical/nuisance dust mask usage","authors":"Yuan Yang ,&nbsp;Jaymie Meliker ,&nbsp;Lauren L. Richmond ,&nbsp;Frank D. Mann ,&nbsp;Minos Kritikos ,&nbsp;Dylan M. Smith ,&nbsp;Tesleem Babalola ,&nbsp;Melissa A. Carr ,&nbsp;Benjamin J. Luft ,&nbsp;Sean A.P. Clouston","doi":"10.1016/j.neuro.2025.02.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>This study explores the relationship between World Trade Center (WTC) response activities (WRAs) and cognitive impairment (CI) and uses a moderated-mediation model to examine the role of wearing a surgical/nuisance dust mask.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>This study includes 3285 WTC responders. Responders were placed into eight WRA groups based on self-report structured responses and free-text descriptions of activities at the WTC. The presence/absence of surgical/nuisance dust mask usage was self-reported. The outcome was CI as determined using a Montreal Cognitive Assessment score &lt; 23. Robust Poisson regression was used to examine the main effect, and counterfactual moderated-mediation analysis was used to determine the role of mask usage.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The risk of CI was higher across most WRAs when compared to supervision. Mask usage was reported by 63 % of responders and varied across WRAs and was associated with a reduced risk of CI (adjusted risk ratio [aRR]=0.77, p = 0.008) after controlling for WRAs. Moderation effects indicated that responders are more likely to wear masks when encountering more dangerous exposures, even within the same WRA group. Responders in the WRA-enclosed group had a lower risk of CI through a moderated intermediary effect of mask usage (aRR=0.92, p = 0.05).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>Surgical/nuisance dust mask usage provided mild protection against air pollution exposures during WTC response activities when compared to not wearing a mask. Results suggest that response workers at disaster sites might benefit from wearing surgical/nuisance dust masks when respirators are unavailable even when the air seems safe.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":19189,"journal":{"name":"Neurotoxicology","volume":"108 ","pages":"Pages 1-10"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neurotoxicology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0161813X25000154","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

This study explores the relationship between World Trade Center (WTC) response activities (WRAs) and cognitive impairment (CI) and uses a moderated-mediation model to examine the role of wearing a surgical/nuisance dust mask.

Methods

This study includes 3285 WTC responders. Responders were placed into eight WRA groups based on self-report structured responses and free-text descriptions of activities at the WTC. The presence/absence of surgical/nuisance dust mask usage was self-reported. The outcome was CI as determined using a Montreal Cognitive Assessment score < 23. Robust Poisson regression was used to examine the main effect, and counterfactual moderated-mediation analysis was used to determine the role of mask usage.

Results

The risk of CI was higher across most WRAs when compared to supervision. Mask usage was reported by 63 % of responders and varied across WRAs and was associated with a reduced risk of CI (adjusted risk ratio [aRR]=0.77, p = 0.008) after controlling for WRAs. Moderation effects indicated that responders are more likely to wear masks when encountering more dangerous exposures, even within the same WRA group. Responders in the WRA-enclosed group had a lower risk of CI through a moderated intermediary effect of mask usage (aRR=0.92, p = 0.05).

Conclusion

Surgical/nuisance dust mask usage provided mild protection against air pollution exposures during WTC response activities when compared to not wearing a mask. Results suggest that response workers at disaster sites might benefit from wearing surgical/nuisance dust masks when respirators are unavailable even when the air seems safe.
世贸中心反应活动与认知健康:外科/滋扰防尘口罩使用作用的有调节中介研究。
目的:探讨世界贸易中心(WTC)反应活动(WRAs)与认知功能障碍(CI)的关系,并采用一个有调节的中介模型来检验佩戴外科/妨妨性防尘口罩的作用。方法:本研究包括3285名WTC应答者。应答者根据自我报告的结构化回答和世贸中心活动的自由文本描述被分为八个WRA组。自我报告是否使用手术/滋扰防尘口罩。结果是使用蒙特利尔认知评估评分确定CI结果:与监督相比,大多数wra的CI风险更高。63%的应答者报告了口罩的使用情况,并且在不同的wra中有所不同,并且在控制wra后与CI风险降低相关(调整风险比[aRR]=0.77, p=0.008)。适度效应表明,在遇到更危险的暴露时,反应者更有可能戴口罩,即使在同一WRA组中也是如此。通过口罩使用的中介效应,wra封闭组的应答者CI风险较低(aRR=0.92, p=0.05)。结论:与不戴口罩相比,在世贸中心响应活动期间,使用外科手术/防尘口罩对空气污染暴露提供了轻微的保护。研究结果表明,即使在空气似乎安全的情况下,在没有呼吸器的情况下,灾难现场的反应人员也可能受益于戴上手术/防尘口罩。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Neurotoxicology
Neurotoxicology 医学-毒理学
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
5.90%
发文量
161
审稿时长
70 days
期刊介绍: NeuroToxicology specializes in publishing the best peer-reviewed original research papers dealing with the effects of toxic substances on the nervous system of humans and experimental animals of all ages. The Journal emphasizes papers dealing with the neurotoxic effects of environmentally significant chemical hazards, manufactured drugs and naturally occurring compounds.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信