Henriks-Eckerman Maj-Len, Mäkelä Erja
1.Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Work Environment Development, Lemminkäisenkatu 14-18 B, FI-20520 Turku, Finland
2.Finnish Institute of Occupational Health, Work Environment Development, Topeliuksenkatu 41 aA, FI-00250 Helsinki, Finland.
Ann Occup Hyg. 2015 Mar;59(2):221-31. doi: 10.1093/annhyg/meu078. Epub 2014 Oct 16.
Reported cases of allergic contact dermatitis caused by methylenediphenyl diisocyanate (MDI) have increased and thereby increased the need for adequate skin protection. Current standardized permeation and penetration test methods give information about efficacy of protective materials against individual components of the polyurethane systems. They do not give information of what kind of clothing materials workers should wear against splashes when handling mixed MDI-polyurethane formulations, which contain MDI, its oligomers, and polyols. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a sensitive penetration test method that can be used to select clothing that is protective enough against uncured splashes of MDI-polyurethane, still easy to use, and also, to find affordable glove materials that provide adequate protection during a short contact. The penetration of MDI through eight representative glove or clothing materials was studied with the developed test procedure. One MDI hardener and two polymeric MDI (PMDI)-polyol formulations representing different curing times were used as test substances. The materials tested included work clothing (woven) fabric, arm shields (nonwoven fabric), old T-shirt, winter gloves, and gloves of nitrile rubber, leather, vinyl (PVC), and natural rubber. A drop (50 µl) of test substance was added to the outer surface of the glove/clothing material, which had Tape Fixomull attached to the inner surface as a collection medium. After penetration times of 5 or 20min, the collecting material was removed and immediately immersed into acetonitrile containing 1-(2-methoxyphenyl)-piperazine for derivatization. The formed urea derivatives of 2,4'-MDI and 4,4'-MDI were analysed using liquid chromatography with mass spectrometric and UV detection. The precision of the test method was good for the material with high penetration (work clothing fabric) of MDI, as the relative standard deviation (RSD) was 14 and 20%. For the arm shield with a low penetration (the nonwoven fabric), the precision was lower with RSDs of 35 and 50%. For two clothing materials, the penetration was high (134-577 µg cm(-2)). Low penetration (<0.5 µg cm(-2)) was shown by the arm shield and the natural rubber glove. Three glove materials showed no detectable MDI penetration (<0.002 µg cm(-2)). Two affordable glove materials (natural rubber and nitrile rubber) and one clothing material (dust proof arm shield) that can provide adequate protection during short contact with solvent free PMDI formulations were found. The new test procedure should be standardized in order to get a new international penetration standard.
由亚甲基二苯基二异氰酸酯(MDI)引起的过敏性接触性皮炎报告病例有所增加,因此对充分的皮肤防护需求也随之增加。当前的标准化渗透和穿透测试方法提供了有关防护材料对聚氨酯体系中各个成分的防护效果的信息。但它们并未提供关于工人在处理含有MDI及其低聚物和多元醇的混合MDI - 聚氨酯配方时应穿何种服装材料来防止飞溅的信息。本研究的目的是开发并验证一种灵敏的穿透测试方法,该方法可用于选择对未固化的MDI - 聚氨酯飞溅具有足够防护能力且仍易于使用的服装,同时还要找到在短时间接触期间能提供充分防护的经济实惠的手套材料。使用所开发的测试程序研究了MDI透过八种代表性手套或服装材料的情况。一种MDI固化剂和两种代表不同固化时间的聚合MDI(PMDI) - 多元醇配方用作测试物质。测试的材料包括工作服(机织)织物、护臂(无纺布)、旧T恤、冬季手套以及腈橡胶、皮革、乙烯基(PVC)和天然橡胶制成的手套。将一滴(50微升)测试物质添加到手套/服装材料的外表面,该材料内表面附着有Tape Fixomull作为收集介质。在渗透5或20分钟后,取出收集材料并立即浸入含有1 - (2 - 甲氧基苯基) - 哌嗪的乙腈中进行衍生化。使用液相色谱结合质谱和紫外检测分析所形成的2,4'-MDI和4,4'-MDI的脲衍生物。对于MDI高渗透率的材料(工作服织物),测试方法的精密度良好,相对标准偏差(RSD)为14%和20%。对于渗透率低的护臂(无纺布),精密度较低,RSD分别为35%和50%。对于两种服装材料,渗透率较高(134 - 577微克/平方厘米)。护臂和天然橡胶手套显示出低渗透率(<0.5微克/平方厘米)。三种手套材料未检测到MDI渗透(<0.002微克/平方厘米)。发现了两种经济实惠的手套材料(天然橡胶和腈橡胶)和一种服装材料(防尘护臂),它们在与无溶剂PMDI配方短时间接触期间能提供充分防护。应将新的测试程序标准化以获得新的国际渗透标准。