Users Online: 548 Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
 

 

Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
     
Year : 1993  |  Volume : 37  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 42-7

Pulmonary function tests--a comparison between urban industrial and rural agricultural workers of Andhra Pradesh.


National Institute of Occupational Health (I.C.M.R.), Methaninagar, Ahmedabad, Gujarat State

Correspondence Address:
N Mohan Rao
National Institute of Occupational Health (I.C.M.R.), Methaninagar, Ahmedabad, Gujarat State

Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


PMID: 8138287

Rights and PermissionsRights and Permissions

Physical parameters and pulmonary function tests (VC, FEV1, FEV1% and FEF25-75%) were collected in 112 urban industrial workers and 104 rural agricultural workers. These average values, values according to age and smoking habits were compared between urban and rural workers. Inspite of no differences in age, rural workers average height, weight, BSA is significantly lower than urban workers. A significant increase in VC value to the extent of 0.22 lit (7.1%), significantly lower FEV 1% value by 4.7% and reduce FEF25-75% value (4.7%) is demonstrated in rural than urban workers. Smoking is shown to produce airway obstruction in both urban and rural workers. A wide variation of PFT values between the present workers and other reported values in India is observed. This study indicates rural workers have better pulmonary capacity and less flow rates than their urban counterpart.


[PDF Not available]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed250    
    Printed26    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded0    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal