Assessment of Primary Health Care for rural workers exposed to pesticides

Dados Bibliográficos

ID16780486
AutoresAlessandra Cristina Pupin Silvério (0000-0003-2093-2713, Universidade José do Rosário Vellano), Isarita Martins (0000-0001-7471-3773, Universidade Federal de Alfenas), Denismar Alves Nogueira (0000-0003-2285-8764, Universidade Federal de Alfenas), Marco Antônio Santos Mello (0000-0002-4966-9958, Universidade José do Rosário Vellano), Edilaine Assunção Caetano de Loyola (0000-0002-4441-1229, Universidade José do Rosário Vellano), Miriam Monteiro De Castro Graciano (0000-0003-2764-6891, Universidade Federal de Lavras)
Ano2020
Volume54
Páginas9
Data de publicação2020-01-21
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoRevista de Saúde Pública (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 0034-8910 • E-ISSN: 0034-8910
EditoraUniversidade de São Paulo. Agência de Bibliotecas e Coleções Digitais (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.11606/s1518-8787.2020054001455
PMID31967278
OpenAlexW3000641445
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas6
Referências citadas15

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the attributes of Primary Health Care (PHC) for rural workers; to analyze sociodemographic conditions, history of poisoning and hospitalizations for pesticides and use of personal protective equipment; and to verify exposure to pesticides by determining bioindicators. METHODS: Cross-sectional, descriptive-analytical study with a sample of 1,027 rural workers living in municipalities belonging to a regional health department in Southern Minas Gerais, whose PHC is governed by the Family Health Strategy model. We used the adult version of the Primary Care Assessment Tool (PCATool Brazil) and a structured questionnaire to collect socioeconomic data, history of poisoning and hospitalization for pesticides and use of personal protective equipment. Blood samples were collected to measure biomarkers of pesticide exposure and signs of renal and hepatic sequelae. RESULTS: Low education was prevalent, as well as the intense contact of workers with pesticides. Frequent use of personal protective equipment was higher among men, as was the history of poisoning and hospitalizations for pesticides. Rates of 20% poisoning, 15% liver disease and 2% nephropathy were detected. Signs of hepatotoxicity were more frequent in men. Gender differences were all statistically significant. Regarding PHC, only the attribute “degree of affiliation” had a high score. None of the poisoning cases detected in the study were previously diagnosed. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the high coverage of the Family Health Strategy, occupational risk and its consequences have not been detected by health services, which do not seem oriented to primary care, even lacking their essential attributes. There is a need for immediate and effective adaptation of public policies regarding the health of rural workers, with adequate training of teams and review of the portfolio of PHC services offered

Cross-sectional study · Disease · Environmental health · Health care · Occupational safety and health · Pathology · Personal protective equipment · Pesticide · Population · Rural area · Socioeconomic status · Health, Nursing, Elderly Care · Medicine · Occupational Health and Burnout · Pesticide Exposure and Toxicity