Banaee Sean, Mathews Airek, Que Hee Shane
Department of Environmental Health Sciences and UCLA Center for Occupational & Environmental Health, Fielding School of Public Health, University of California Los Angeles, 650 Charles E Young Jr Drive South, Los Angeles, California 90095-1772, United States.
J Chem Health Saf. 2024 Mar 20;31(3):253-258. doi: 10.1021/acs.chas.3c00117. eCollection 2024 May 27.
The current technique to assess glove resistance to chemicals for worker protection relies on challenging a flat, 2.54 cm diameter glove piece at or near room temperature. This does not simulate a donned whole glove near the skin temperature subjected to work activity forces. Four different types of disposable nonpowdered unlined/unsupported nitrile gloves in triplicate were measured for thickness, porosity, and for the acrylonitrile content () of the challenge and collection sides. Limonene permeation at 35 °C through a whole glove on a clenching and nonclenching dextrous robot hand and with the standard ASTM F739 technique were facilitated by taking samples from the collection sides for GC-MS analysis. The standardized breakthrough time (SBT) when permeation reached 100 ng/cm/min and the steady state permeation rate (SSPR) depended on , thickness, and porosity. Only the thinnest glove (Lavender) showed statistically significant ( ≤ 0.05) increased average SSPR for the clenching hand relative to the nonclenching hand and for the ASTM technique. The ASTM test data for the three thickest gloves were not statistically different from those of the robot hand, but differed from the manufacturer's. More research with different chemicals and higher clenching forces is needed. Clenching forces can enhance the permeation. Workers wearing ultrathin disposable nitrile gloves have a higher potential for chemical penetration/permeation. Company glove permeation data obtained near room temperature may have a longer SBT and lower SSPR than in practice. Double gloving may be advisible in emergencies and for unknown chemicals when no appropriate thicker Chemical Protective glove is available.
当前用于评估手套对化学品的防护性能以保护工人的技术，依赖于在室温或接近室温的条件下，对一块直径为2.54厘米的扁平手套进行测试。这无法模拟贴近皮肤温度且承受工作活动力的戴在手上的完整手套。对四种不同类型的一次性无粉无衬里/无支撑丁腈手套进行了三次测量，以测定其厚度、孔隙率以及测试面和收集面的丙烯腈含量（）。通过从收集面取样进行气相色谱 - 质谱分析，在35°C下，借助标准的ASTM F739技术，在握紧和不握紧的灵巧机器人手上，对完整手套进行柠檬烯渗透测试。当渗透达到100 ng/cm/min时的标准化突破时间（SBT）和稳态渗透速率（SSPR）取决于、厚度和孔隙率。只有最薄的手套（淡紫色）在握紧手相对于不握紧手以及与ASTM技术相比时，平均SSPR有统计学显著增加（≤0.05）。三种最厚手套的ASTM测试数据与机器人手的测试数据在统计学上无差异，但与制造商的数据不同。需要对不同化学品和更高握紧力进行更多研究。握紧力会增强渗透。佩戴超薄一次性丁腈手套的工人有更高的化学物质穿透/渗透可能性。在室温附近获得的公司手套渗透数据可能在实际应用中具有更长的SBT和更低的SSPR。在紧急情况下以及对于未知化学品且没有合适的更厚化学防护手套时，建议戴双层手套。
