Differences in serum concentrations of per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances by occupation among firefighters, other first responders, healthcare workers, and other essential workers in Arizona, 2020-2023.

IF 4.1 3区 医学 Q2 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Cedar L Mitchell, James Hollister, Julia M Fisher, Shawn C Beitel, Ferris Ramadan, Shawn O'Leary, Zhihua Tina Fan, Karen Lutrick, Jefferey L Burgess, Katherine D Ellingson
{"title":"Differences in serum concentrations of per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances by occupation among firefighters, other first responders, healthcare workers, and other essential workers in Arizona, 2020-2023.","authors":"Cedar L Mitchell, James Hollister, Julia M Fisher, Shawn C Beitel, Ferris Ramadan, Shawn O'Leary, Zhihua Tina Fan, Karen Lutrick, Jefferey L Burgess, Katherine D Ellingson","doi":"10.1038/s41370-025-00753-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Certain occupations have greater risk for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) exposure because of PFAS use in occupation-associated materials.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We sought to assess whether PFAS concentrations differed by occupation among certain Arizona workers and whether concentrations differed over time by occupation.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Serum concentrations for 14 PFAS were measured among 1960 Arizona Healthcare, Emergency Responder, and Other Essential Worker Study participants. Samples were collected at enrollment and periodically during July 2020-April 2023. Occupational categories included firefighters, other first responders, healthcare workers, and other essential workers. We fit multilevel regression models for each PFAS to estimate differences in geometric mean concentrations or odds of PFAS detection at enrollment by occupational category. For participants with ≥1 serum sample, we evaluated for yearly longitudinal differences in PFAS concentrations by occupational category. We used other essential workers for comparison, and adjusted for age, sex, race and ethnicity, year, and residential county.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Adjusting for covariates, firefighters had higher perfluorohexanesulfonic acid (PFHxS), branched and linear perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS), and perfluoroheptanesulfonic acid (PFHpS) concentrations than other essential workers (geometric mean ratios 95% CIs: 1.26 [1.11-1.43]; 1.18 [1.06-1.32]; 1.19 [1.08-1.31]; and 1.19 [1.01-1.39], respectively). Healthcare workers had higher odds of detection of branched perfluorooctanoic acid (Sb-PFOA) and perfluorododecanoic acid (PFDoA) than other essential workers, adjusting for covariates (odds ratios 95% CIs: 1.35 [1.01-1.80]; 2.50 [1.17-5.34], respectively). During the 3-year study, we detected declines in PFAS concentrations among other essential workers; few longitudinal differences in concentrations by occupation were detected.</p><p><strong>Impact statement: </strong>Using data from a large prospective cohort of frontline workers in Arizona, we compared serum concentrations of 14 per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) among firefighters, other first responders, healthcare workers, and other frontline essential workers. We found that firefighters have higher concentrations of certain PFAS chemicals and the odds of detecting other PFAS chemicals are higher among healthcare workers compared with people in other occupations. Our findings highlight the importance of further action to reduce PFAS exposure within highly exposed occupational groups, such as firefighters, and the need to expand evaluation of exposure among other occupations, including healthcare workers.</p>","PeriodicalId":15684,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41370-025-00753-7","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Certain occupations have greater risk for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) exposure because of PFAS use in occupation-associated materials.

Objective: We sought to assess whether PFAS concentrations differed by occupation among certain Arizona workers and whether concentrations differed over time by occupation.

Methods: Serum concentrations for 14 PFAS were measured among 1960 Arizona Healthcare, Emergency Responder, and Other Essential Worker Study participants. Samples were collected at enrollment and periodically during July 2020-April 2023. Occupational categories included firefighters, other first responders, healthcare workers, and other essential workers. We fit multilevel regression models for each PFAS to estimate differences in geometric mean concentrations or odds of PFAS detection at enrollment by occupational category. For participants with ≥1 serum sample, we evaluated for yearly longitudinal differences in PFAS concentrations by occupational category. We used other essential workers for comparison, and adjusted for age, sex, race and ethnicity, year, and residential county.

Results: Adjusting for covariates, firefighters had higher perfluorohexanesulfonic acid (PFHxS), branched and linear perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS), and perfluoroheptanesulfonic acid (PFHpS) concentrations than other essential workers (geometric mean ratios 95% CIs: 1.26 [1.11-1.43]; 1.18 [1.06-1.32]; 1.19 [1.08-1.31]; and 1.19 [1.01-1.39], respectively). Healthcare workers had higher odds of detection of branched perfluorooctanoic acid (Sb-PFOA) and perfluorododecanoic acid (PFDoA) than other essential workers, adjusting for covariates (odds ratios 95% CIs: 1.35 [1.01-1.80]; 2.50 [1.17-5.34], respectively). During the 3-year study, we detected declines in PFAS concentrations among other essential workers; few longitudinal differences in concentrations by occupation were detected.

Impact statement: Using data from a large prospective cohort of frontline workers in Arizona, we compared serum concentrations of 14 per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) among firefighters, other first responders, healthcare workers, and other frontline essential workers. We found that firefighters have higher concentrations of certain PFAS chemicals and the odds of detecting other PFAS chemicals are higher among healthcare workers compared with people in other occupations. Our findings highlight the importance of further action to reduce PFAS exposure within highly exposed occupational groups, such as firefighters, and the need to expand evaluation of exposure among other occupations, including healthcare workers.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.90
自引率
6.70%
发文量
93
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Exposure Science and Environmental Epidemiology (JESEE) aims to be the premier and authoritative source of information on advances in exposure science for professionals in a wide range of environmental and public health disciplines. JESEE publishes original peer-reviewed research presenting significant advances in exposure science and exposure analysis, including development and application of the latest technologies for measuring exposures, and innovative computational approaches for translating novel data streams to characterize and predict exposures. The types of papers published in the research section of JESEE are original research articles, translation studies, and correspondence. Reported results should further understanding of the relationship between environmental exposure and human health, describe evaluated novel exposure science tools, or demonstrate potential of exposure science to enable decisions and actions that promote and protect human health.
×
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