# Assessment of Impact of High Particulate Concentration on Peak Expiratory Flow Rate of Lungs of Sand Stone Quarry Workers

^{1}

^{2}

^{*}

## Abstract

**:**

## Introduction

## Observations

- Stone quarries were selected to cover all the deposits around Jodhpur.
- Selection of workers: Selection of workers was based upon the exposure duration, type of works and socioeconomic factors. Persons having any respiratory problem were excluded from the study. Only male workers were considered because female workers percentage is negligible.
- Development of questionnaire: The ATS-DLD (American Thoracic Society- Division of Lung Diseases) questionnaire was modified and prepared in ‘Hindi’ language
- Respirable Particulate concentration in ambient air was measured with the help of ‘High Volume Air Sampler’ for every activity. These activities are designated as loading, dressing and drilling and the workers who perform these works are called labour, dresser and driller respectively. The concentrations of these activities are designated as 1, 2 and 3 for normal quarry environment (i.e. loading), dressing and drilling respectively.
- The Peak expiratory flow rate (Maximum expiratory flow rate that can be achieved and sustained for a period of 1.0 sec) of workers engaged in different type of activities was measured with the help of Spirometer (Spiroweb, manufacture by drcdrecare, Hydrabad, India). The predicted value of Peak Expiratory Flow Rate (PEFRp- it depends upon height, weight and age of human) of each worker was calculated by using ERS -93 Equations. Table- 1 gives the average value of RSPM.The control population was selected from the society of same socioeconomic status but these workers were not exposed to mine environment but they are exposed to normal ambient environment. The effect on respiratory tract is chronic therefore exposure duration was divided in four categories, 0–5 yr., 5–10 yr., 10–15 yr. and >15 yr. and these categories are designated as 1, 2, 3 and 4 respectively. Categories of workers, number of workers in each categories and exposure categories are given in table- 2.The reduction in Peak Expiratory Flow Rate of lung is calculated and it is designated as IPEFR and is given by Eq-1. The values of PEFRp are calculated by ERS-93 Equation[7] (i.e Eq 2 & Eq 3). The mean values of index (IPEFR) are shown in table- 3. The PEFR and other required parameters (i.e. height, weight, age and sex) of 419 workers were recorded out of which 374 were quarry workers and 45 were in the category of control population.
- Morbidity Analysis: ATS-DLD questionnaire was used for study. The different types of respiratory problems found among the workers are given in table 4. The results are shown in terms of percentage of population suffering from different types of problems.

## Regression Analysis for IPEFR

_{1}and X

_{2}is considered:

_{0}

_{,}β

_{1}and β

_{2}are constants and are known as the parameters of the model. The dependent variable IPEFR is denoted by ‘Y’. The independent variables EXCAT (i.e. exposure categories of workers) and PCAT (i.e. particulate concentration categories) are denoted by X

_{1}& X

_{2}respectively. The regression analysis is done by using the data from table- 3. Let the estimates of β

_{0}, β

_{1}and β

_{2}are denoted by b

_{0}, b

_{1}and b

_{2}respectively. The values of b

_{0}, b

_{1}and b

_{2}are obtained by the principle of least squares. The data given in table -3 are analyzed and calculated statistical parameters are given in table 5.

#### Analysis of Variance for Regression

_{0}: β

_{1}= β

_{2}= 0 against H

_{1}: not all β

_{k}= 0: (k=1, 2)

_{k}

_{,}

_{n}

_{−}

_{k}

_{−1,}

_{α}= 8.02

_{k}

_{,}

_{n}

_{−}

_{k}

_{−1,}

_{α}; hence reject H

_{0}at α level of significance therefore significance of individual β’s be tested by ‘t – test’.

#### t-test (for Testing Individual β’s of Multiple Linear Regression Model)

_{0}: β

_{j}= 0 against H

_{1}: β

_{j}≠ 0 : (j=1,2)

_{1}) = 9.515

_{2}) = 9.490

_{n}

_{−}

_{k}

_{−1;}

_{α}

_{/2}= 2.26

_{n}

_{−}

_{k}

_{−1;}

_{α}

_{/2}; therefore reject H

_{0}. Hence β

_{1}≠ 0 and β

_{2}≠ 0

_{0}, b

_{1}and b

_{2}are

_{0}=0.326

_{1}=0.04153

_{2}=0.05673

^{2}is 0.953 which means that about 95 % of variation in the dependent variable “Y” (IPEFR) is due to independent variables X

_{1}and X

_{2}

#### Significance Test for Mean IPEFR (For two Population Means)

^{*}) the Cochran–cox test is applied and the value of test statistics t

_{c}, for different cases are given in col. (13). Whereas, if value of F-statistic is insignificant then t-statistics for different cases, are calculated and its values are given in col. (9). Significant values of these statistics are marked with

^{*}. The critical values for F, and Cochran-cox tests are given in cols. (7) and (12). The critical value of ‘t’ i.e.

## Conclusions

Activity | Particulate concentration | Concentration category |
---|---|---|

Normal Quarry Environment | 4800 μg/m^{3} | 1 |

Dressing | 9300 μg/m^{3} | 2 |

Drilling | 18500 μg/m^{3} | 3 |

Category of workers | Exposure duration in Years | Number of workers | Exposure category |
---|---|---|---|

Labour (132) | 0–5 | 26 | 1 |

5–10 | 31 | 2 | |

10–15 | 29 | 3 | |

>15 | 46 | 4 | |

Dresser (126) | 0–5 | 27 | 1 |

5–10 | 33 | 2 | |

10–15 | 31 | 3 | |

>15 | 35 | 4 | |

Driller (116) | 0–5 | 26 | 1 |

5–10 | 33 | 2 | |

10–15 | 28 | 3 | |

>15 | 29 | 4 | |

Control workers | ---------- | 45 | ------ |

No. of workers | Worker Category | EXP DUR | EXCAT | PCAT | Mean IPEFR |
---|---|---|---|---|---|

26 | Labour | 0–5 | 1 | 1 | 0.4355 |

31 | Labour | 5–10 | 2 | 1 | 0.4800 |

29 | Labour | 10–15 | 3 | 1 | 0.4727 |

46 | Labour | >15 | 4 | 1 | 0.5669 |

27 | Dresser | 0–5 | 1 | 2 | 0.4593 |

33 | Dresser | 5–10 | 2 | 2 | 0.5166 |

31 | Dresser | 10–15 | 3 | 2 | 0.5685 |

35 | Dresser | >15 | 4 | 2 | 0.6078 |

26 | Driller | 0–5 | 1 | 3 | 0.5329 |

33 | Driller | 5–10 | 2 | 3 | 0.5798 |

28 | Driller | 10–15 | 3 | 3 | 0.6220 |

29 | Driller | >15 | 4 | 3 | 0.6568 |

45 | Control Population | --- | --- | 0.3209 |

Type of respiratory problem in combination | Prevalence in percentage |
---|---|

Wheezing | 3.8 |

Cough | 7.5 |

Dyspnoea | 10.9 |

Silicosis | 2.4 |

Tuberculosis | 0.3 |

Wheezing, Dyspnoea | 3.5 |

Dyspnoea, Silicosis | 3.5 |

Cough, Wheezing | 1.6 |

Dyspnoea, Cough | 1.2 |

Wheezing, Dyspnoea, Cough, Silicosis | 5.6 |

Dyspnoea, Silicosis, Asthma | 5.3 |

Dyspnoea, Cough, Silicosis | 3.5 |

Wheezing, Dyspnoea, Cough | 4.1 |

Wheezing, Dyspnoea, Cough, Silicosis, Asthma | 1.9 |

Wheezing, Dyspnoea, Cough, Silicosis, Tuberculosis | 1.1 |

Wheezing, Dyspnoea, Cough, Silicosis, Asthma, Tuberculosis | 1.3 |

Other combination of problems | 1.1 |

Population with “No Problems” | 41.4 |

Statistical Parameter | Values |
---|---|

R | 0.976 |

R –Square | 0.953 |

F | 90.296 |

b_{0} | 0.326, (t=19.267) |

b_{1} | 0.04153, (t=9.515) |

b_{2} | 0.05673, (t=9.490) |

Std. error of the estimate | 0.0169062 |

Worker Category | Excat | n | MIPEFR | VRIMPEFR | F | Fν_{1}, ν_{2,0.05} | S_{p} | t | w_{1} | t_{1α/2} | t_{cr} | t_{c} | TEST |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

Labour | 1 | 26 | 0.4355 | 0.02781 | 2.593* | 1.753 | ------ | ------ | 0.001112 | 2.0600 | 2.0518 | 5.57981 | Cochran-Cox |

Labour | 2 | 31 | 0.4800 | 0.01788 | 1.657 | 1.720 | 0.01412 | 75.921* | ----- | ----- | ------- | ------ | t-test |

Labour | 3 | 29 | 0.4727 | 0.03842 | 3.565* | 1.733 | ------ | ------ | 0.001372 | 2.0480 | 2.0429 | 6.03720 | Cochran-Cox |

Labour | 4 | 46 | 0.5669 | 0.02485 | 2.280* | 1.645 | ------- | ------ | 0.000552 | 2.0160 | 2.0157 | 11.92050 | Cochran-Cox |

Dresser | 1 | 27 | 0.4593 | 0.02087 | 1.939* | 1.747 | -------- | ------ | 0.000803 | 2.0560 | 2.0463 | 7.08343 | Cochran-Cox |

Dresser | 2 | 33 | 0.5166 | 0.02537 | 2.349* | 1.708 | ------ | ------ | 0.000793 | 2.0360 | 2.0310 | 8.89311 | Cochran-Cox |

Dresser | 3 | 31 | 0.5685 | 0.01945 | 1.798* | 1.720 | ------ | ------- | 0.000648 | 2.0420 | 2.0345 | 11.31670 | Cochran-Cox |

Dresser | 4 | 35 | 0.6078 | 0.02483 | 2.295* | 1.696 | ------ | ------- | 0.000730 | 2.0340 | 2.0292 | 12.08877 | Cochran-Cox |

Driller | 1 | 26 | 0.5329 | 0.01235 | 1.149 | 1.753 | 0.01177 | 104.58* | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------- | t-test |

Driller | 2 | 33 | 0.5798 | 0.02001 | 1.845* | 1.708 | ------ | ------- | 0.000625 | 2.0360 | 2.0300 | 11.84728 | Cochran-Cox |

Driller | 3 | 28 | 0.6220 | 0.01930 | 1.795* | 1.740 | ------ | ------- | 0.000715 | 2.0520 | 2.0425 | 12.64320 | Cochran-Cox |

Driller | 4 | 29 | 0.6568 | 0.00892 | 1.205 | 1.798 | 0.01041 | 172.29* | ------ | ------- | ----- | ------- | t-test |

Control Population | 45 | 0.2297 | 0.01091 | ------ | ------ | ------ | w_{2}=0.000248 | t_{2α/2}=2.0150 | ------ | ------- | --------- |

^{*}Significant values of the test statistic under consideration.

^{**}The critical value of ‘t’ i.e. t

_{n}

_{1+}

_{n}

_{2−2;α}is taken as 1.96 (i.e. for normal distribution)

## References

- Chatterjee, C. C. Human Physiology; Medical Allied Agency: M. G. Road Calcutta-9, 1987. [Google Scholar]
- Nemery, B.; Behr, J.; Bourke, S.; et al. Interstitial lung disease induced by exogenous agents: Factors governing Susceptibility. Eur Respi Journal
**2001**, 18 suppl-32, 30–42. [Google Scholar] - Ostle, B. Statistics in Research; The IOWA State College Press, AMES, IOWA, 1954. [Google Scholar]
- Paliwal, B. S. (Ed.) Geological Evolution of Northwestern India; Scientific Publishers: Jodhpur, India, 1999.
- Pareek, S. Basin configuration and sedimentary stratigraphy of Western Rajasthan. Journal Geological Society of India
**1981**, 22, 517–527. [Google Scholar] - Parks, W. R. Occupational lung disorders, 2nd Ed ed; Butterworths & Co (Publishers) Ltd: London, 1982. [Google Scholar]
- User Manual: “RMS Medspiror”; Recorders & Medicare Systems: 181/5 Phase-I, Industrial Area, Chandigarh India, 1999.

© 2006 MDPI. All rights reserved.

## Share and Cite

**MDPI and ACS Style**

Singh, S.K.; Chowdhary, G.R.; Purohit, G. Assessment of Impact of High Particulate Concentration on Peak Expiratory Flow Rate of Lungs of Sand Stone Quarry Workers. *Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health* **2006**, *3*, 355-359.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph2006030046

**AMA Style**

Singh SK, Chowdhary GR, Purohit G. Assessment of Impact of High Particulate Concentration on Peak Expiratory Flow Rate of Lungs of Sand Stone Quarry Workers. *International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health*. 2006; 3(4):355-359.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph2006030046

**Chicago/Turabian Style**

Singh, Suresh Kumar, G. R. Chowdhary, and Gopal Purohit. 2006. "Assessment of Impact of High Particulate Concentration on Peak Expiratory Flow Rate of Lungs of Sand Stone Quarry Workers" *International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health* 3, no. 4: 355-359.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph2006030046