This review examines the respiratory health consequences associated with the rapid expansion and commercialization of the poultry industry. Increased production efficiency and demand have paralleled a documented rise in occupational respiratory disease among poultry workers. The article synthesizes evidence linking workplace exposures in poultry barns and processing facilities to airway inflammation, hypersensitivity reactions, and chronic lung injury, and emphasizes prevention, surveillance, and the clinical role in early detection.
Workers in poultry production are exposed to a complex mixture of airborne agents generated by intensive farming and processing. These exposures arise from multiple sources including bedding and manure, feed handling, bird handling, processing operations, and the built environment of poultry barns. The review highlights that exposures are not limited to a single agent but involve concurrent organic and inorganic compounds, biological agents, and particulate matter that vary with facility type and management practices.
Key airborne contaminants identified in the review include feathers, mites, feed dust, molds, ammonia, and bacterial endotoxins. These agents can provoke airway inflammation and hypersensitivity and have been associated with both acute symptoms and chronic respiratory impairment. The composite nature of these exposures—biological material plus chemical irritants—contributes to a pathophysiologic milieu that may produce both asthma-like responses and chronic obstructive patterns.
Poultry industry workers may report a spectrum of respiratory symptoms. Commonly described manifestations include wheezing, chest tightness, chronic cough, and exertional or resting dyspnea. The review notes that such symptoms, if unrecognized or not managed, can progress to clinically significant respiratory conditions, including occupational asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The temporal relationship between workplace exposure and symptom onset is clinically important for identifying occupational attribution.
The review emphasizes that healthcare providers are central to preventing disease progression through early recognition. Essential actions include obtaining a detailed occupational history that explores tasks, duration and intensity of exposure, symptom timing related to work, and use of protective measures. Appropriate diagnostic evaluation may include spirometry and other tests to characterize airflow limitation and reversibility, though specific diagnostic algorithms are not detailed in the abstract. Providers are also tasked with counseling, arranging workplace communication when appropriate, and coordinating follow-up to monitor disease course.
Current approaches to mitigate respiratory risk focus on reducing airborne contaminants through best practices and engineering, administrative controls, and personal protective equipment. The review states that strategies to minimize pollutants are actively being researched and implemented. In addition to primary prevention, the review highlights the need for ongoing surveillance systems to identify at-risk workers and emerging problems, as well as educational efforts directed at workers and employers to improve recognition and control of hazardous exposures.
The abstract underscores continuing research into effective interventions and the implementation of best practices to reduce exposure-related disease. Specific gaps are not enumerated in the abstract; it broadly calls for ongoing surveillance, preventive measures, and education. The review consolidates current understanding while implying the need for further study on optimized workplace controls, long-term outcomes, and tailored clinical management strategies for affected workers.
The authors declare no competing interests. This review appears in Curr Allergy Asthma Rep, 2026 (volume 26, issue 1, article 46) and is indexed with PMID 42665724 and DOI 10.1007/s11882-026-01289-y. MeSH terms assigned to the article include occupational air pollutants and occupational respiratory diseases, reflecting the epidemiology and etiology focus of the review.
References cited within the review include environmental and occupational studies on intensive poultry farming, respiratory risk among poultry workers, exposure assessments in processing facilities, and broader environmental health implications of poultry operations. The abstract indicates a comprehensive reference list in the full article for clinicians and researchers seeking primary source details.