Bryden P A, McKnight R H, Westneat S C
Southeast Center for Agricultural Health and Injury Prevention, College of Public Health, University of Kentucky, 1141 Red Mile Road, Suite 102, Lexington, Kentucky 40504-9842, USA.
J Agric Saf Health. 2005 May;11(2):159-66. doi: 10.13031/2013.18182.
The extent to which bystanders are exposed to pesticide applications is unknown. Systematic monitoring around spray areas is not routine. Quantifying exposures is extremely difficult. Persons inadvertently exposed to pesticides often do not know the chemical or quantity, and persons living near areas of frequent field spraying may receive multiple exposures. In the U.S., concerns about health consequences from these exposures may prompt calls to poison control centers. The goal of this study was to determine what surveillance poison control centers can provide on environmental pesticide exposures to bystanders. We searched the American Association of Poison Control Centers' 2001 electronic medical records for exposure reports involving persons from 129 agriculturally intensive counties in Kentucky, Tennessee, Louisiana, and Arkansas that implicated at least one of 54 generic classifications of agricultural chemicals. We abstracted 980 pesticide-related records. Narrative sections were reviewed to determine bystander status of the exposed person. Forty-six bystander exposures were identified from 32 events. Bystander ages ranged from 2 to 81 (median: 45; 16 females, 13 males). All pertinent information for bystander classification came from narrative sections of the record. 28% identified aircraft crop dusters as the pesticide source. The most implicated substance was malathion (30.4%), while 19.6% did not know the exposure substance. 73.9% of cases were symptomatic; 65.2% of the exposed persons were seen in or referred to a healthcare facility. No hospitalizations or deaths were reported. Although they may underestimate the true numbers, U.S. poison control center data can provide valuable information about bystander environmental pesticide exposures.
旁观者接触农药喷洒的程度尚不清楚。在喷洒区域周围进行系统监测并非惯例。量化接触情况极其困难。意外接触农药的人往往不知道化学品或接触量，而居住在频繁进行田间喷洒区域附近的人可能会多次接触。在美国，对这些接触造成的健康后果的担忧可能会促使人们致电中毒控制中心。本研究的目的是确定中毒控制中心在监测旁观者环境农药接触方面能提供哪些信息。我们在美国中毒控制中心协会2001年的电子病历中搜索了涉及肯塔基州、田纳西州、路易斯安那州和阿肯色州129个农业密集县居民的接触报告，这些报告涉及至少54种通用分类的农用化学品中的一种。我们提取了980份与农药相关的记录。对叙述部分进行了审查，以确定接触者的旁观者身份。从32起事件中识别出46起旁观者接触事件。旁观者年龄从2岁到81岁不等（中位数：45岁；女性16人，男性13人）。所有与旁观者分类相关的信息均来自记录的叙述部分。28%的事件确定飞机作物喷粉机为农药来源。涉及最多的物质是马拉硫磷（30.4%），而19.6%的人不知道接触的物质。73.9%的病例出现症状；65.2%的接触者在医疗机构就诊或被转诊。未报告住院或死亡情况。尽管美国中毒控制中心的数据可能低估了实际数字，但它们可以提供有关旁观者环境农药接触的宝贵信息。
