↓ Skip to main content

Case series of keratitis in poultry abattoir workers induced by exposure to the ultraviolet disinfection lamp

Overview of attention for article published in Annals of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
8 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
16 Mendeley
Title
Case series of keratitis in poultry abattoir workers induced by exposure to the ultraviolet disinfection lamp
Published in
Annals of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s40557-015-0087-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Do-Hyeong Kwon, Jai-Dong Moon, Won-Ju Park, Won-Yang Kang, Soo-Hyeon Kim, Hyeong-Min Lim, Ji-Sung Ahn, Hong-Jae Chae

Abstract

An outbreak of eye diseases occurred among workers at a poultry abattoir in South Korea from December 2012 to June 2013. An epidemiological investigation of the causative agent was conducted. The workers were given a special health examination and workplace environmental monitoring was performed. Workers with ocular symptoms subsequently underwent an ophthalmic examination. From a total of 41 workers, 26 (63.4 %) were diagnosed with keratoepitheliopathy by ophthalmic examination. Environmental monitoring of the workplace revealed that the ultraviolet (UV) apron-disinfection lamp had not been turning off at the set times, and so the workers' faces had been exposed to UV radiation. Effective radiation dose measurement showed a UV-B exposure of 7-30 μW/cm(2), and a UV-C exposure of 40-200 μW/cm(2); both values exceed the occupational exposure limits. The outbreak ceased after the lamp was repaired. This case shows that inappropriate use of the UV disinfection lamp can cause mass photokeratitis. In order to prevent this, the UV disinfection lamp must be checked regularly, workers must be educated on the health effects of UV radiation, and appropriate eye protection must be worn.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 16 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 16 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 25%
Unspecified 2 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 6%
Unknown 9 56%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 25%
Unspecified 2 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 6%
Unknown 9 56%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 January 2016.
All research outputs
#22,759,802
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Occupational and Environmental Medicine
#159
of 197 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#344,044
of 402,283 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Occupational and Environmental Medicine
#5
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 197 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.5. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 402,283 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.