Institute of Occupational Medicine, Research Avenue North, Edinburgh, EH14 4AP, UK.
Environ Sci Process Impacts. 2014 Jan;16(1):141-7. doi: 10.1039/c3em00511a.
Several methods exist to estimate dermal exposure and it is unclear how comparable they are. These methods fall into three main categories: (i) removal techniques (such as wiping or rinsing); (ii) interception techniques (such as gloves, patches, or coveralls); and (iii) fluorescent tracer techniques. Controlled experiments were conducted to compare two removal methods for exposure to particulate, and a removal method with an interception method for exposure to liquids. Volunteers' hands were exposed to three liquid solutions (glycerol-water solutions of different concentrations) and three particulates (Epsom salts, calcium acetate and zinc oxide) in simulated exposure scenarios. Both hands were exposed and a different sampling method was used on each to allow comparison of methods. Cotton glove samplers and a cotton wipe sampling method were compared for exposure to liquids. For exposure to powders a cotton wipe sampling method was compared to rinsing the hands in deionised water. Wipe and rinse methods generally yielded similar results for Epsom salts and zinc oxide (geometric mean [GM] ratios of wipe-to-rinse measurements of 0.6 and 1.4, respectively) but they did not for calcium acetate (GM wipe-to-rinse ratio of 4.6). For glycerol solutions measurements from the glove samplers were consistently higher than wipe samples. At lower levels of exposure the relative difference between the two methods was greater than at higher levels. At a hand loading level of 24,000 μg cm(-2) (as measured by wiping) the glove-to-wipe ratio was 1.4 and at a hand loading of 0.09 μg cm(-2) the ratio was 42.0. Wipe and rinse methods may be directly comparable but the relationship between glove and wipe sampling methods appears to be complex. Further research is necessary to enable conversion of exposure measurements from one metric to another, so as to facilitate more reliable risk assessment.
有几种方法可以估算皮肤暴露量,目前尚不清楚这些方法的可比性如何。这些方法主要分为三类:(i)去除技术(如擦拭或冲洗);(ii)截留技术(如手套、补丁或防护服);和(iii)荧光示踪技术。进行了对照实验,比较了两种去除技术(一种用于暴露于颗粒物,另一种用于暴露于液体)。志愿者的手在模拟暴露场景中暴露于三种液体溶液(不同浓度的甘油-水混合物)和三种颗粒(泻盐、醋酸钙和氧化锌)。双手均暴露于溶液中,每种溶液使用不同的采样方法,以便比较方法。对暴露于液体的情况,比较了棉手套采样器和棉拭子采样方法。对于暴露于粉末的情况,将棉拭子采样方法与在去离子水中冲洗双手进行了比较。擦拭和冲洗方法通常对泻盐和氧化锌产生相似的结果(擦拭到冲洗测量的几何平均值 [GM] 比值分别为 0.6 和 1.4),但对醋酸钙则不然(GM 擦拭到冲洗比值为 4.6)。对于甘油溶液,手套采样器的测量值始终高于拭子样品。在较低暴露水平下,两种方法之间的相对差异大于较高暴露水平。在手部加载水平为 24,000μgcm(-2)(通过擦拭测量)时,手套到拭子的比值为 1.4,在手部加载水平为 0.09μgcm(-2)时,比值为 42.0。擦拭和冲洗方法可能直接可比,但手套和拭子采样方法之间的关系似乎很复杂。需要进一步研究才能实现从一种度量到另一种度量的暴露测量值转换,从而促进更可靠的风险评估。