Pesticide exposure in greenspaces: Comparing field measurement of dermal contamination with values predicted by registration models

Since 2014, the Agricultural Operator Exposure Model (AOEM) has been the harmonised European model used for estimating non-dietary operator exposure to pesticide. It is based on studies conducted by the pesticide companies and it features 13 different crops including non-agricultural areas such as amenity grasslands. The objective of this study was to compare the dermal exposure measured during a field study conducted in a non-agricultural area with the corresponding values estimated by the model AOEM. The non-controlled field study was conducted in France in 2011 and included 24 private and public gardeners who apply glyphosate with knapsack sprayers. Dermal exposure was measured using the whole-body method and cotton gloves. Each measured value had an estimated value given by AOEM and we tested their correlation using linear regression. The model overestimated body exposure for all observations and there was no correlation between values. However, it underestimated hand exposure by 42 times and it systematically underestimated the exposure when the operators were wearing gloves, especially during the application. The model failed at being conservative regarding hand exposure and highly overestimated the protection afforded by the gloves. At a time of glyphosate renewed approval in Europe, non-controlled field studies conducted by academics are needed to improve AOEM model, especially in the non-agricultural sector. Indeed, among the 34 studies included in the model, none were conducted on a non-agricultural area and only four assessed the exposure when using a knapsack sprayer. Moreover, knapsack sprayers being the main equipment used worldwide in both agricultural and non-agricultural settings, it is also crucial to integrate new data specific to this equipment in the model. Operator exposure should be estimated with accuracy in the registration process of pesticides to ensure proper safety as well as in epidemiological studies to improve exposure assessment.

Pesticide Exposure in Fruit-Growers: Comparing Levels and Determinants Assessed under Usual Conditions of Work (CANEPA Study) with Those Predicted by Registration Process (Agricultural Operator Exposure Model)

Knowledge of pesticide exposure levels in farmers is necessary for epidemiological studies and regulatory purposes. In the European pesticide registration process, operators’ exposure is predicted using the Agricultural Operator Exposure Model (AOEM), created in 2014 by the European Food Safety Authority based on studies conducted by the pesticide industry. We compared operators’ exposures during treatment days in the apple-growing industry under non-controlled working conditions and AOEM-predicted values. The dermal exposure of thirty French apple-growers from the CANEPA study when applying two fungicides was measured using body patches and cotton gloves. For each observation, the corresponding exposure was calculated by means of the AOEM, using data recorded about the operator, spraying equipment and personal protective equipment (PPE) used. A significant linear correlation was observed between calculated and measured daily exposures. The model overestimated the daily exposure approximately 4-fold and the exposure during application 10-fold. However, exposure was underestimated during mixing/loading for 70% of the observations when the operator wore PPE. The AOEM did not overestimate exposures in all circumstances, especially during mixing/loading, when operators handle concentrated products. The protection provided by PPE appeared to be overestimated. This could be due to the optimal working conditions under which the “industrial” studies are conducted, which may not be representative of real working conditions of operators in fruit-growing.

Influence of repeated contacts on the transfer of elemental metallic lead between compartments in an integrated conceptual model for dermal exposure assessment

Transfer of contaminants to and from the skin surface has been postulated to occur through a number of different pathways and compartments including: object(s)-to-skin, skin-to-skin, skin-to-clothing, skin-to-gloves, air-to-skin, skin-to-lips, and skin-to-saliva. However, many identified transfer pathways have been only minimally examined to determine the potential for measurable transfer. The purpose of this study was to quantitatively evaluate repeated transfer between different compartments using elemental metallic lead (Pb) in the solid form using a series of systematic measurements in human subjects. The results demonstrated that some transfer pathways and compartments are significantly more important than others. Transfer of Pb could not be measured from skin to cotton clothing or skin to laminate countertop surfaces. However, transfer was consistently measured for skin-to-skin and between the skin and the surface of nitrile gloves, suggesting the potential for significant transfer to or from these compartments in real-world exposure scenarios, and the importance of these pathways. With repeated contacts, transfer increased non-linearly between 1 and 5 contacts, but appeared to approach a steady state distribution among the compartments within 10 contacts. Consistent with other studies, relative to 100% transfer for a single contact, the quantitative transfer efficiency decreased with repeated contacts to 29% after 5 contacts and 11-12% after 10 contacts; for skin-to-skin transfer measurements, transfer efficiency after either 5 or 10 contacts was approximately 50% of the single contact transfer. These data are likely to be useful for refining current approaches to modeling of repeated contacts for dermal exposure and risk assessment.

Prediction of Dermal Exposure to Chemical Substances Using a Fluorescence Method within the SysDEA Project

Dermal exposure is an important exposure route for occupational exposure and risk assessment. A fluorescence method has been developed to quantify occupational dermal exposure based on a visualization technique, using Tinopal SWN as a fluorescent tracer. The method was developed within the framework of a large experimental study, the SysDEA project. In SysDEA, dermal exposure was measured with different methods for 10 simulated exposure situations by sampling powder and liquid formulations containing Tinopal SWN on coveralls and patches and subsequently chemically analysing them. For the fluorescence method, photographs of exposed volunteers who performed the experiments were taken inside a room which consisted of an optimized arrangement of several UV irradiating tube light brackets, reflective and non-reflective backgrounds for maximum light diffusion and a camera. Image processing analysis software processed these photographs to obtain corresponding light intensity in terms of summed pixel values. To be able to estimate the amount of Tinopal SWN, 25% of the measured data from the SysDEA experiments were used to calibrate by correlating the summed pixel values from the photographs to actual measured exposure values using a second order regression model. For spraying both high and low viscosity liquids, showing uniformly distributed exposure patterns, strong Pearson correlation coefficients (R > 0.77) were observed. In contrast, the correlations were either inconsistently poor (R = -0.17 to 0.28 for pouring, rolling high viscosity liquid, manually handling objects immersed in low viscosity liquid and handling objects contaminated with powder), moderate (R = 0.73 for dumping of powder), or strong (R = 0.83 and 0.77 for rolling low viscosity liquid and manually handling objects immersed in high viscosity liquid). A model for spraying was developed and calibrated using 25% of the available experimental data for spraying and validated using the remaining 75%. Under given experimental conditions, the fluorescence method shows promising results and can be used for the quantification of dermal exposure for different body parts (excluding hands) for spraying-like scenarios that have a more uniform exposure pattern, but more research is needed for exposure scenarios with less uniform exposure patterns. For the estimation of exposure levels, the surface loading limit should be lower than 1.5░µg/cm2 (a lower limit could not be quantified based on experiments conducted in this study) on a large surface, like a coverall, which should be ideally perpendicular to the camera.

Modelling Exposure by Spraying Activities-Status and Future Needs

Spray applications enable a uniform distribution of substances on surfaces in a highly efficient manner, and thus can be found at workplaces as well as in consumer environments. A systematic literature review on modelling exposure by spraying activities has been conducted and status and further needs have been discussed with experts at a symposium. This review summarizes the current knowledge about models and their level of conservatism and accuracy. We found that extraction of relevant information on model performance for spraying from published studies and interpretation of model accuracy proved to be challenging, as the studies often accounted for only a small part of potential spray applications. To achieve a better quality of exposure estimates in the future, more systematic evaluation of models is beneficial, taking into account a representative variety of spray equipment and application patterns. Model predictions could be improved by more accurate consideration of variation in spray equipment. Inter-model harmonization with regard to spray input parameters and appropriate grouping of spray exposure situations is recommended. From a user perspective, a platform or database with information on different spraying equipment and techniques and agreed standard parameters for specific spraying scenarios from different regulations may be useful.

Occupational Exposure to Diisocyanates in the European Union

Objectives

Diisocyanates are a chemical group that are widely used at workplaces in many sectors. They are also potent skin- and respiratory sensitizers. Exposure to diisocyanates is a main cause of occupational asthma in the European Union. To reduce occupational exposure to diisocyanates and consequently the cases of diisocyanate-induced asthma, a restriction on diisocyanates was recently adopted under the REACH Regulation in the European Union.

Methods

A comprehensive evaluation of the data on occupational exposure to the most important diisocyanates at workplaces was made and is reported here. The diisocyanates considered are methylene diphenyl diisocyanate (MDI), toluene diisocyanate (TDI), and hexamethylene diisocyanate (HDI), accounting for more than 95% of the market volume in the EU. The exposure assessment is based on data from Chemical Safety Reports (CSRs) of REACH Registration Dossiers, workplace air monitoring data from Germany, from the UK Health and Safety Executive (HSE), and literature data relevant for the EU, and the USA.

Results

Occupational exposure to diisocyanates is particularly relevant in: (i) C.A.S.E. applications (Coatings, Adhesives, Sealants, Elastomers), (ii) production of polyurethanes (PUs) (e.g. slab-stock foam), (iii) handling of partly uncured PU products (e.g. cutting, demoulding, spray application of foam), and (iv) when diisocyanates/PUs are heated (e.g. hot lamination, foundry applications/casting forms). Ranking of the reported data on inhalation to diisocyanate exposure at workplaces (maximum values) leads to following order: (i) HDI and its oligomers in coatings, (ii) MDI in spray foam applications, (iii) TDI in manufacture of foam, (iv) TDI in manufacture of PUs and PU composite materials, (v) TDI in adhesives, (vi) MDI in adhesives, (vii) MDI in manufacture of PUs and PU composite materials, (viii) TDI in coatings, (ix) MDI in manufacture of foam, and (x) HDI in adhesives.

What Do Occupational Hygienists Really Know About Skin Exposure?

This article describes responses to a questionnaire on current work practices and understanding of the management of dermal exposure issues in the workplace from members of the British Occupational Hygiene Society (BOHS) and the Australian Institute of Occupational Hygienists (AIOH). The survey comprised questions in four key areas: employment demographics, experience managing dermal exposure, knowledge of dermal exposure management, and opinions on professional knowledge gaps and preferred training methods. The survey was disseminated in 2016 in the UK and 2018 in Australia, with 116 and 114 responses from each jurisdiction, respectively. The majority of respondents had personally evaluated the risks of dermal exposure to chemicals (BOHS 92%; AIOH 86%), albeit infrequently (less than a few times per year). Occupational Hygienists reportedly adopted a range of strategies to control dermal exposure problems, including chemical elimination/substitution (BOHS 68%; AIOH 68%), changing work practices (BOHS 79%; AIOH 75%), and education (BOHS 77%; AIOH 83%). The use of gloves or other personal protective equipment remained the most commonly cited exposure control measure (BOHS 99%; AIOH 97%). While there appeared to be a good understanding of common dermal exposure workplace scenarios (e.g. isocyanate exposure in motor vehicle repair, solvent exposure during spray painting), the overwhelming majority of respondents wished to find out more about assessing the risks from dermal exposure to chemicals (BOHS 89%; AIOH 88%). The outcomes suggest ways to increase the competence of professionals in dealing with dermal exposure matters in the workplace, through mechanisms such as web-based guidance, interactive educational materials and webinars, as well as workshops and seminars.

Corneocyte Nanotexture as Biomarker for Individual Susceptibility to Skin Irritants

Irritant contact dermatitis is a wide spread occupational skin condition. In addition to generalized protection and teaching schemes, a knowledge about individual risk might add to an improved awareness for hazards. Here, we report on a novel candidate biomarker, which might stage individual susceptibility to irritant skin damage. Subclinical sensitivity was proven in recent studies. As a nano-anatomical measure, it works non-invasively on corneocytes from tape strips. Here, we report on a 7-day course after exposure to sodium lauryl sulphate and compare the novel cell texture index with the classical markers water loss (transepidermal water loss) and natural moisturizing factor. All parameters show a high degree of correlation.

Experimental Assessment of Inhalation and Dermal Exposure to Chemicals During Industrial or Professional Activities in Relation to the Performance of ECETOC TRA

For many work situations only insufficient exposure data are available to perform proper risk assessment. Because measuring worker exposure can be time consuming and resource intense, the availability of reliable exposure models is important when performing risk assessments. However, the development and improvement of exposure models are hampered by scarcity of sound exposure data as well as by lack of information on relevant exposure factors and conditions of exposure. This paper describes a study where inhalation and dermal exposure data were collected under defined conditions. Exposure scenarios examined included tasks that have not been investigated in previous validation studies. The results of these measurements were compared with ECETOC TRA model version 3.1 predictions. In this study, five exposure scenarios were selected, namely ‘use in a closed batch process’ (PROC 4), ‘mixing or blending in a partly open batch process’ (PROC 5), ‘rolling’ (PROC 10), ‘immersion’ (PROC 13), and ‘stirring’ (PROC 19). These PROCs stem from the descriptors that Registration, Evaluation and Authorization of Chemicals has established to depict the identified uses of chemical substances. These exposure scenarios were selected mainly because little or no data are available for these situations, or ECETOC TRA is likely to underestimate exposure for these situations. Experiments were performed by volunteers for the selected exposure scenarios, in which tasks were performed aiming to represent real workplace situations. In total 70 experiments were performed, during which 70 dermal exposure measurements (5 volunteers × 2 repeats × 7 scenarios) and 32 inhalation exposure measurements (4 volunteers × 2 repeats × 4 scenarios) were collected. Two formulations were used, namely pure Tinopal SWN powder (solid product, a fluorescent tracer) and 0.5% Tinopal SWN dissolved in 1,2-dichloroethane (1,2-DCE). DCE is considered a moderate volatile liquid. For exposure scenarios using the liquid formulation, both inhalation and dermal measurements were performed, while for exposure scenarios using the pure powder only dermal exposure measurements were performed. In addition, photographs were taken under ultraviolet light to qualitatively assess exposure patterns on hands and body. Volunteers repeatedly performed a selection of tasks under standardized conditions in a test chamber for each exposure scenario. Results show that ECETOC TRA overestimated dermal hand exposure for all PROCs included in the study, and was considered to be conservative. Additionally, ECETOC TRA overestimated inhalation exposure for closed and partially closed processes, but underestimated inhalation exposure for rolling and handling of immersed objects. Qualitative assessment of the hands and body showed mainly the hands were exposed for tasks involving closed and partially closed processes and when handling of immersed objects. Exposure to other body segments were also observed for rolling and stirring. In conclusion, this study gave insights into dermal and inhalation exposure levels during selected task scenarios, and showed that ECETOC TRA is conservative when dermal exposure is estimated. Inhalation exposure estimates for PROCs 10 and 13 tasks with the moderate volatility liquid were underestimated in this study. It may be therefore necessary to re-evaluate base model predictions for these scenarios when medium fugacity liquids are involved.