An estimated 200,000 to 500,000 U.S. workers in concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) are at risk of adverse respiratory outcomes from exposures to indoor contaminants. In the wintertime, general ventilation is minimized in the Midwest due to high heating costs required to maintain indoor temperatures optimal for animal production. Pit fans typically operate to exhaust under-floor manure pits, but little other fresh air intake exists. Many operators believe that these systems are sufficient to reduce contaminant concentrations within the building during winter. Investigating whether these pit fans provide sufficient protection against classic CAFO contaminants during minimal wintertime ventilation was warranted. Direct-reading instruments were used to measure and record concentrations of multiple contaminants using both fixed-area and mobile contaminant mapping in a farrowing room during a Midwest winter. With the exception of CO, concentrations were significantly (p<0.001) higher with the pit fan off compared with those with the pit fan on. Additional analyses identified that significant changes (p<0.001) in mean room concentrations of respirable dust (decreased, 77% with pit fan off and 87% with pit fan on) and CO2 (increased, 24%) over the 5-hr study periods and that multiple fixed-area monitors rather than the much-used, single center-of-room monitor provided a more conservative (e.g., protective) assessment of room concentrations. While concentrations did not exceed occupational exposure limits from OSHA or ACGIH for individual contaminants, recommended agricultural health limits from exposure-response studies suggested in the literature were exceeded for respirable dust, CO2, and NH3, indicating a need to consider personal exposures and control options to reduce contaminant concentrations in farrowing rooms. Pit fans reduced NH3 and H2S concentrations, but these fans may not be sufficient to control dust and eliminate the need for secondary exposure prevention methods.
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 07 March 2024.
All research outputs
#10,325,337
of 33,738,238 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene
#531
of 1,246 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,086
of 237,283 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene
#7
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 33,738,238 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,246 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 56% of its peers.
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 237,283 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
