ERJ
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Published online before print February 14, 2007, 10.1183/09031936.00127906
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Permissions
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (3)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Schulze, A.
Right arrow Articles by Radon, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Schulze, A.
Right arrow Articles by Radon, K.
Eur Respir J 2007; 29:1169-1173
Copyright ©ERS Journals Ltd 2007

Characterisation of asthma among adults with and without childhood farm contact

A. Schulze1,2, R. T. van Strien1,3, G. Praml1, D. Nowak1 and K. Radon1

1 Institute for Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Unit for Occupational and Environmental Epidemiology and Net Teaching, Ludwig-Maximilians-University, Munich, 2 GSF-National Research Centre for Environment and Health, Institute of Epidemiology, Neuherberg, Germany. 3 Dept of Environmental Medicine, Municipal Health Service Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

CORRESPONDENCE: K. Radon, Institute and Outpatient Clinic for Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Ziemssenstr. 1, D-80336 Munich, Germany. Fax: 49 8951604954. E-mail: Katja.Radon{at}med.uni-muenchen.de

Keywords: Bronchial provocation, farming, hygiene hypothesis, inhalant allergens, lung function tests

Received: October 2, 2006
Accepted January 24, 2007


   ABSTRACT
TOP
 ABSTRACT
METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
 REFERENCES
 
Childhood farm contact is associated with a lower prevalence of sensitisation and allergic rhinitis. Findings have been contradictory for asthma. The aim of the present study was to investigate the differences between farm and nonfarm subjects using objective measurements.

A cross-sectional questionnaire study was performed among rural adults aged 18–44 yrs, of which 37% lived on a farm during the first 3 yrs of life and were thus referred to as "farm subjects". Lung function, bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR) to methacholine and sensitisation were measured in a random sample. A total of 1,595 subjects were included in the analyses.

Among farm subjects, sensitisation against inhalant allergens (odds ratio (OR) 0.7; 95% confidence interval 0.6–0.9), allergic rhinitis (0.5 (0.4–0.8)) and asthma diagnosis (0.7(0.4–1.1)) were less common than among nonfarm subjects. For BHR and lung function, no statistically significant differences were found between the two groups. Stratifying for sensitisation, farm subjects had a lower OR of asthma diagnosis (0.5 (0.3–1.0)) and a nonsignificantly reduced OR of BHR with sensitisation (0.8 (0.5–1.1)).

The present study confirmed, using objective measurements, that farm subjects have a lower prevalence of symptoms and asthma diagnosis, while the prevalence of bronchial hyperresponsiveness does not differ.

It has been suggested that a more hygienic lifestyle may be responsible for the increase in allergic disease in recent years 1. Several studies 2–6 have shown that growing up on a farm is associated with a lower prevalence of sensitisation and hay fever among children, a fact that backs up the hygiene hypothesis. Different studies 7–11 have suggested that the effect of childhood farm living on sensitisation and hay fever may persist until adulthood.

Some studies 5–7, 10, 12 also showed a lower prevalence of asthma and asthma-like symptoms for individuals who lived on a farm during childhood. However, other studies showed heterogeneous effects across different study centres 13 or for different timing of farm living 14. In some cases 15, farm living even tended to be a risk factor for asthma.

It is possible that a different aetiology of allergic and nonallergic asthma may help explain the aforementioned findings 16. Although asthma is still widely thought to be an atopic disease, usually less than half of adult asthmatics are atopic 17. Therefore, the influence of testing for sensitisation on asthma diagnosis should not be underestimated.

Another problem may be the different definitions of asthma encountered across studies due to the lack of a gold standard. A highly sensitive but less specific definition of asthma includes the test for bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR) 18. The specificity might be increased using self-reported doctors' diagnosed asthma; however, variations in awareness of asthma symptoms and thus use of health services, as well as labelling of asthma by doctors, might reduce the validity of the definition 19.

The aim of the present study was to investigate the differences in asthma and allergies between rural farm and nonfarm subjects using questionnaire data and objective measurements. Different phenotypes of asthma, as well as differences in perception of asthma symptoms, between farm and nonfarm subjects were assessed.


   METHODS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 METHODS
RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
 REFERENCES
 
Study design and data collection
Through local registration authorities, all adults of German nationality aged 18–44 yrs, who lived in four selected rural towns in Lower Saxony (North-Western Germany), were asked to take part in the Lower Saxony Lung Study. Before mailing the questionnaire, subjects were randomly divided in two groups (fig. 1Go). The first group was asked to join the questionnaire survey and the medical examination (n = 7,080), while the second group was asked to join the questionnaire survey only (n = 3,172). Subjects received the questionnaire and a letter between 2002 and 2004 explaining the study. Where necessary, repeated contacts ensued in order to secure maximum response. Questionnaire participation was 67% in the group with medical examination and 70% in the group with questionnaire only. The study was approved by the Medical Ethical Committee of the Ludwig-Maximilians-University Munich (Munich, Germany) and the Lower Saxony Medical Board.


Figure 1
View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 1— Flow chart of the study and subjects included in the present analyses. BHR: bronchial hyperresponsiveness; Ig: Immunoglobulin. #: subjects included in the present analyses.

 
Respiratory health questions were taken from the European Community Respiratory Health Survey questionnaire 20. Data on specific farm-related items were obtained using questions taken from the Allergy and Endotoxin study 2. In addition, questions on demographic characteristics and other potential confounders were asked.

Medical examination consisted of pulmonary function testing, followed by bronchial challenge with methacholine (MCH) and blood sampling. Informed consent for the medical examination was obtained from 2,812 of the eligible subjects (40% of those invited by questionnaire). Figure 1Go shows the number of subjects completing the separate parts of the medical examination. Exclusion criteria for the MCH challenge (e.g. heart disease, pregnancy, forced expiratory volume in one second (FEV1) <80% predicted) accounted for 59% of the subjects not tested for BHR. Participants of the MCH challenge were more likely to be male and less likely to have symptoms of asthma than nonparticipants. After a detailed explanation of the procedure, 23% refused to cooperate and the remaining 18% gave no reason for not cooperating.

Lung function was performed with a body plethysmograph (Jaeger, Würzburg, Germany), according to American Thoracic Society criteria 21, and is shown as percentage of predicted, based on sex, height and age 22. The Tiffeneau index was calculated as the ratio of FEV1 and vital capacity 22. In addition, the MCH challenge was performed stepwise (doubling or quadrupling doses), using an APS dosimeter (Jaeger) until a fall in FEV1 of 20% occurred (maximum cumulative dose 1.2 mg). The procedure was adapted from the European Community Respiratory Health protocol. As previously described elsewhere 23, the number of false positives at a cumulative dose of 1.2 mg was high. Therefore, a cumulative dose of 0.6 mg was chosen as a cut-off value for the analyses. However, using 1.2 mg as a cut-off level did not considerably change the results.

Specific immunoglobulin (Ig)E was measured in serum samples (Pharmacia, Freiburg, Germany) against a mix of inhalant allergens (via SX1 allergy screening; Timothy grass, rye, mugwort, birch, Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus, Cladosporium herbarum, cat and dog). A specific IgE concentration of 0.35 kU·L–1, corresponding to a radioallergosorbent test class ≥1, was regarded as positive 20.

Statistical methods
Logistic regression analysis was used to calculate odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). These models were a priori adjusted for sex, age, passive and active smoking, level of education, family history of allergic disease and number of siblings.

Linear regression analysis was used to calculate differences in lung function parameters between different groups.


   RESULTS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 METHODS
 RESULTS
DISCUSSION
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
 REFERENCES
 
The statistical analyses were based upon subjects with complete data who were born in the former Western part of Germany (n = 1,595; fig. 1Go). Subjects included in the analyses were more likely to have lived on a farm during the first 3 yrs of life. These were referred to as "farm subjects". Subjects included in the analyses were older and less likely to be active smokers than subjects excluded from the analyses. In addition, subjects included in the analyses reported symptoms of wheezing without having a cold or an asthma diagnosis less frequently (table 1Go).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 1— Descriptive data comparing subjects# included in the analyses with those who had to be excluded

 
The prevalence of allergic rhinitis and sensitisation among farm subjects was about half of the prevalence among the nonfarm population (table 2Go). Similar results were seen for doctors' diagnosis of asthma and wheezing. Stratifying for sensitisation the differences in asthma diagnosis between the two groups were confined to sensitised subjects. However, CIs overlapped and the interaction term between sensitisation and farm contact did not reach the level of statistical significance (p = 0.56). BHR and baseline Tiffeneau index were not significantly different between farm and nonfarm subjects. The same was true for other lung function parameters (data not shown). Similar results were seen when adjusting for potential confounders.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Table 2— Prevalence and odds ratios(OR) comparing farm# and nonfarm subjects for respiratory symptoms, asthma and allergic rhinitis, sensitisation, bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR) and lung function

 
To further study the protective influence of a farm childhood on asthma phenotype, the overlap between asthma diagnosis, BHR and sensitisation for farm and nonfarm subjects was analysed (fig. 2Go). In these analyses the adjusted ORs for farm, as compared with nonfarm subjects, were less than one for combinations involving sensitisation only.


Figure 2
View larger version (5K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]

  		Fig. 2— Adjusted odds ratio (OR; 95% confidence interval (CI)) of immunoglobulin (Ig)E, bronchial hyperresponsiveness (BHR) and asthma diagnosis (Drdx) and their combination for farm subjects (n = 537) when compared with nonfarm subjects (n = 653). A specific IgE concentration of 0.35 kU·L–1, corresponding to a radioallergosorbent test class ≥1, was regarded as positive. Adjusted for sex, age, passive and active smoke exposure, level of education, family history of allergic diseases and presence of siblings.

 

   DISCUSSION
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
 REFERENCES
 
The comparison between rural subjects who grew up on a farm and rural subjects without a farm childhood resulted in a significantly lower prevalence of allergic rhinitis, sensitisation and asthma, but not BHR or lung function for farm subjects.

Different papers investigating the effect of a farm childhood on respiratory health of adults are available. In these studies 7, 10, 12, 24, 25 a lower prevalence of allergies could be confirmed, while the results on the prevalence of asthma have been conflicting. Different asthma phenotypes between farm and nonfarm subjects have been discussed in this context. Eduard et al. 24 showed a lower prevalence of atopic and a higher prevalence of nonatopic asthma comparing animal farmers with farmers producing plants. These results could not be confirmed when comparing farmers with the general population 25. One reason might be that current exposure to the farming environment, and not childhood exposure to the farming environment, was used as marker of exposure in the study by Eduard et al. 25.

In the present study, approximately one-third of the farm subjects also had current farm contact. Therefore, one might speculate that the associations seen were mainly driven by current farm contact, rather than by childhood farm living. However, taking current exposure during adulthood into account did not change the present results. Likewise, restricting the current study population to subjects with farm contact during the first 3 yrs of life and those who never had farm contact did not alter the findings. Unfortunately, intensity of recent farm contact could not be included in the analyses as the data were not available for the participants.

With respect to living on a farm in early childhood, the present authors had to rely on self-reports. Therefore, some misclassification of exposure may bias the results. Furthermore, migration out of the study area might have occurred. As the likelihood of migration might be related to both exposure and outcome, this might have biased the present results. Only prospective cohort studies starting in early childhood may overcome this problem.

The strengths of the present study were: 1) a good response to the questionnaire part of the study among a large population-based sample of rural subjects; 2) the use of validated questionnaire instruments 23; and 3) objective measurements of sensitisation, lung function and BHR in approximately half of the population. To reduce selection bias, subjects were a priori randomly divided in two groups. The first group was asked to join the questionnaire survey and the medical examination, while the second group was asked to join the questionnaire survey only. The clinical measurements were performed according to standardised procedures with thorough quality control.

A considerable proportion of subjects were not tested for BHR, which could have introduced some selection bias. As the proportion of asthmatics was the same among the individuals who participated in the clinical measurements (6.1%) and those who did not (5.7%; p = 0.70), no major bias was anticipated. The percentage of farm (3.8%) and nonfarm subjects (5.2%) that had to be excluded from the bronchial challenge due to low baseline FEV1 values differed slightly but it was not statistically significant (p = 0.10, Chi-squared test).

As no gold standard for asthma exists 18, 19, asthma was defined in several different ways in the present study. However, the results were similar irrespectively of the definition used, e.g. asthma diagnosis, symptoms of wheeze without having a cold. In addition, defining asthma as having an asthma attack, having been woken by an attack of shortness of breath during the previous 12 months or currently taking asthma medication (current asthma), as suggested by Kogevinas et al. 26, did not alter the results.

In conclusion, the present study demonstrates that adult subjects who grew up on a farm exhibit a lower prevalence of respiratory allergies and report asthma symptoms and diagnosis less frequently. However, no differences between farm and nonfarm subjects could be found in the prevalence of bronchial hyperresponsiveness.


   ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
REFERENCES
 
The authors would like to thank B. Schwertner, M. Dutschke, J. Post, U. Auge, A. König and S. Schelinski for the field work and all the study participants for their cooperation.


   REFERENCES
TOP
 ABSTRACT
 METHODS
 RESULTS
 DISCUSSION
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
 REFERENCES
 

  1. Strachan DP. Family size, infection and atopy: the first decade of the "hygiene hypothesis". Thorax 2000;55: Suppl. 1 S2–S10.[CrossRef][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  2. Braun-Fahrländer C, Riedler J, Herz U, et al. Environmental exposure to endotoxin and its relation to asthma in school-age children. N Engl J Med 2002;347:869–877.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  3. Downs SH, Marks GB, Mitakakis TZ, Leuppi JD, Car NG, Peat JK. Having lived on a farm and protection against allergic diseases in Australia. Clin Exp Allergy 2001;31:570–575.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  4. Merchant JA, Naleway AL, Svendsen ER, et al. Asthma and farm exposures in a cohort of rural Iowa children. Environ Health Perspect 2005;113:350–356.[Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  5. von Ehrenstein OS, von Mutius E, Illi S, Baumann L, Bohm O, von Kries R. Reduced risk of hay fever and asthma among children of farmers. Clin Exp Allergy 2000;30:187–193.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  6. Ernst P, Cormier Y. Relative scarcity of asthma and atopy among rural adolescents raised on a farm. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2000;161:1563–1566.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  7. Kilpelainen M, Terho EO, Helenius H, Koskenvuo M. Childhood farm environment and asthma and sensitization in young adulthood. Allergy 2002;57:1130–1135.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  8. Braback L, Hjern A, Rasmussen F. Trends in asthma, allergic rhinitis and eczema among Swedish conscripts from farming and non-farming environments. A nationwide study over three decades. Clin Exp Allergy 2004;34:38–43.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  9. Pekkanen J, Xu B, Jarvelin MR. Gestational age and occurrence of atopy at age 31- a prospective birth cohort study in Finland. Clin Exp Allergy 2001;31:95–102.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  10. Leynaert B, Neukirch C, Jarvis D, et al. Does living on a farm during childhood protect against asthma, allergic rhinitis, and atopy in adulthood?. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2001;164:1829–1834.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  11. Kauffmann F, Oryszczyn MP, Maccario J. The protective role of country living on skin prick tests, immunoglobulin E and asthma in adults from the epidemiological study on the genetics and environment of asthma, bronchial hyper-responsiveness and atopy. Clin Exp Allergy 2002;32:379–386.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  12. Portengen L, Sigsgaard T, Omland O, Hjort C, Heederik D, Doekes G. Low prevalence of atopy in young Danish farmers and farming students born and raised on a farm. Clin Exp Allergy 2002;32:247–253.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  13. Chrischilles E, Ahrens R, Kuehl A, et al. Asthma prevalence and morbidity among rural Iowa schoolchildren. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2004;113:66–71.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  14. Wickens K, Lane JM, Fitzharris P, et al. Farm residence and exposures and the risk of allergic diseases in New Zealand children. Allergy 2002;57:1171–1179.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  15. Salam MT, Li YF, Langholz B. Gilliland FD, Children’s Health Study. Early-life environmental risk factors for asthma: findings from the Children's Health Study. Environ Health Perspect 2004;112:760–765.[Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  16. Wenzel SE. Asthma: defining of the persistent adult phenotypes. Lancet 2006;368:804–813.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  17. Pearce N, Pekkanen J, Beasley R. How much asthma is really attributable to atopy?. Thorax 1999;54:268–272.[Free Full Text]
  18. Toren K, Brisman J, Jarvholm B. Asthma and asthma-like symptoms in adults assessed by questionnaires. A literature review. Chest 1993;104:600–608.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  19. Sunyer J, Basagana X, Burney P, Anto JM. International assessment of the internal consistency of respiratory symptoms. European Community Respiratory Health Study (ECRHS). Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2000;162:930–935.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  20. Nowak D, Heinrich J, Jörres R, et al. Prevalence of respiratory symptoms, bronchial hyperresponsiveness and atopy among adults: West and East Germany. Eur Respir J 1996;9:2541–2552.[Abstract]
  21. Standardization of Spirometry, 1994 Update. American Thoracic Society. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1995;152:1107–1136.[Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  22. Quanjer PH, Tammeling GJ, Cotes JE, et al. Lung volumes and forced ventilatory flow. Report Working Party Standardization of Lung Function Tests, European Community for steel and coal. Official Statement of the European Respiratory Society. Eur Respir J 1993; 6: Suppl. 16, 5–40
  23. Praml G, Scharrer E, de la Motte D, et al. The physical and biological doses of methacholine are different for Mefar MB3 and Jaeger APS sidestream nebulizers. Chest 2005;128:3585–3589.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  24. Eduard W, Douwes J, Omenaas E, Heederik D. Do farming exposures cause or prevent asthma? Results from a study of adult Norwegian farmers. Thorax 2004;59:381–386.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  25. Eduard W, Omenaas E, Bakke PS, Douwes J, Heederik D. Atopic and non-atopic asthma in a farming and a general population. Am J Ind Med 2004;46:396–399.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  26. Kogevinas M, Anto JM, Sunyer J, Tobias A, Kromhout H, Burney P. Occupational asthma in Europe and other industrialised areas: a population-based study. European Community Respiratory Health Survey Study Group. Lancet 1999;353:1750–1754.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]



This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Eur Respir JHome page
J. Douwes, S. Cheng, N. Travier, C. Cohet, A. Niesink, J. McKenzie, C. Cunningham, G. Le Gros, E. von Mutius, and N. Pearce
Farm exposure in utero may protect against asthma, hay fever and eczema
Eur. Respir. J., September 1, 2008; 32(3): 603 - 611.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Permissions
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (3)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Schulze, A.
Right arrow Articles by Radon, K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Schulze, A.
Right arrow Articles by Radon, K.

HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS