Division of Field Studies and Engineering, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Cincinnati, OH 45226, USA.
Fire Safety Research Institute, UL Research Institutes, Columbia, MD 21045, USA.
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023 Jan 24;20(3):2108. doi: 10.3390/ijerph20032108.
Chronic health risks associated with firefighting continue to be documented and studied, however, the complexity of occupational exposures and the relationship between occupational exposure and contaminated personal protective equipment (PPE) remains unknown. Recent work has revealed that common PPE cleaning practices, which are becoming increasingly more common in the fire service, are not effective in removing certain contaminants, such as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), from PPE. To better understand the relationship between contaminated firefighter PPE and potential exposure to PAHs, and to gain further understanding of the efficacy of cleaning practices, we used a standardized fire exposure simulator that created repeatable conditions and measured PPE surface contamination levels via wipe sampling and filters attached to firefighter gear worn by standing mannequins. This study examined the effects of repeated (40 cycles) PPE cleaning (laundering and on-scene preliminary exposure reduction (PER) techniques) and repeated exposures on PAH concentration on different surfaces. Further exploration included examination of contamination breakthrough of turnout jackets (comparing outer shell and interior liner) and evaluation of off-gassing PAHs from used gear after different cleaning treatments. When compared by jacket closure type (zipper and hook and dee), total PAH concentration wiped from gear after exposure and cleanings showed no significant differences. Regression analysis indicated that there was no effect of repeated exposures on PAH contamination levels (all sampling sites combined; before fire 10, 20, and 40; after fire 1, 10, 20, and 40; -value > 0.05). Both laundering and on-scene PER significantly reduced contamination levels on the exterior pants and helmets and were effective at reducing PAH contamination. The jacket outer shell had significantly higher PAH contamination than the jacket liner. Both laundering and wet soap PER methods (post-fire) are effective in reducing surface contamination and appear to prevent accumulation of contamination after repeated exposures. Semi-volatile PAHs deep within the fibers of bulky PPE are not effectively reduced via PER or machine laundering, therefore, permitting continued off-gassing of these compounds. Further research is needed to identify the most effective laundering methods for firefighter turnout gear that considers the broad spectrum of common contaminants.
与消防相关的慢性健康风险仍在不断被记录和研究,然而,职业暴露的复杂性以及职业暴露与受污染的个人防护装备(PPE)之间的关系仍不清楚。最近的研究表明,常见的 PPE 清洁方法,这些方法在消防部门越来越普遍,但不能有效地去除 PPE 上的某些污染物,如多环芳烃(PAHs)。为了更好地了解受污染的消防队员 PPE 与潜在的 PAHs 暴露之间的关系,并进一步了解清洁方法的效果,我们使用了标准化的火灾暴露模拟器,该模拟器创建可重复的条件,并通过擦拭采样和附着在消防员装备上的过滤器来测量 PPE 表面污染水平,这些过滤器附着在由站立的人体模型穿着的消防员装备上。这项研究考察了重复(40 次)清洁 PPE(洗涤和现场初步暴露减少(PER)技术)和重复暴露对不同表面 PAH 浓度的影响。进一步的探索包括检查防护服(比较外罩和内部衬里)的污染突破情况,以及评估经过不同清洁处理后的旧装备的 PAHs 排放情况。通过夹克闭合类型(拉链和钩和环)进行比较,暴露和清洁后从装备上擦拭的总 PAH 浓度没有显著差异。回归分析表明,重复暴露对 PAH 污染水平没有影响(所有采样点组合;火灾前 10、20 和 40;火灾后 1、10、20 和 40;-值> 0.05)。洗涤和现场 PER 都显著降低了外部裤子和头盔上的污染水平,并且有效地降低了 PAH 污染。夹克外罩的 PAH 污染明显高于夹克衬里。洗涤和湿肥皂 PER 方法(火灾后)都能有效地降低表面污染,并且似乎可以防止在重复暴露后污染的积累。半挥发性 PAHs 深藏在大块 PPE 的纤维内部,不能通过 PER 或机器洗涤有效地降低,因此,这些化合物仍会继续排放。需要进一步研究,以确定最有效的洗涤方法,用于考虑广泛的常见污染物的消防队员防护服。