Dalton P, Wysocki C J, Brody M J, Lawley H J
Monell Chemical Senses Center, Philadelphia, PA 19104, USA.
Am J Ind Med. 1997 May;31(5):558-69. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1097-0274(199705)31:5<558::aid-ajim10>3.0.co;2-y.
The subjectivity of irritancy judgments can bias attempts to establish exposure guidelines that protect individuals from the sensory irritation produced by volatile chemicals. At low to moderate chemical concentrations, naive and occupationally exposed individuals often show considerable variation in the reported levels of perceived irritation. Such variation could result from differences in exposure history, differences in the perceived odor of a chemical, or differences in generalized response tendencies to report irritation, or response bias. Thus, experimental evaluation of sensory irritancy must dissociate sensory irritation from response bias. To this end, judgments of perceived irritation from 800 ppm acetone were obtained from acetone-exposed workers and age- and gender-matched naive controls. To assess the role of response bias during exposure to odorants, subjects were also exposed to phenylethyl alcohol (PEA), an odorant that does not produce sensory irritation. Following exposure, subjects completed a subjective symptom survey that included symptoms that have been associated with long-term solvent exposures and symptoms that have not. Acetone-exposed workers and naive controls reported large differences in the perceived intensity of odor and irritation from acetone, yet no differences in the perception of PEA. However, for both groups, the most significant factors mediating reported irritancy and health symptoms from acetone were the perceived intensity of its odor and an individual's bias to report irritation from PEA. The perception of odor intensity and degree of response bias will differ between and within groups of exposed and naive individuals; hence, an assessment of the influence of these factors in experimental and workplace studies of chemical irritancy is warranted.
刺激性判断的主观性可能会使旨在制定接触准则以保护个体免受挥发性化学物质产生的感官刺激的努力产生偏差。在低至中等化学浓度下,未经接触和职业接触个体在报告的感知刺激水平上往往表现出相当大的差异。这种差异可能源于接触史的不同、对化学物质感知气味的不同、报告刺激的一般反应倾向的不同,即反应偏差。因此,感官刺激性的实验评估必须将感官刺激与反应偏差区分开来。为此,从接触丙酮的工人以及年龄和性别匹配的未接触对照组中获取了对800 ppm丙酮的感知刺激判断。为了评估接触气味剂期间反应偏差的作用,受试者还接触了苯乙醇(PEA),一种不会产生感官刺激的气味剂。接触后,受试者完成了一项主观症状调查,其中包括与长期接触溶剂相关的症状和无关症状。接触丙酮的工人和未接触对照组报告了对丙酮气味和刺激感知强度的巨大差异,但对PEA的感知没有差异。然而,对于两组来说,介导报告的丙酮刺激性和健康症状的最显著因素是其气味的感知强度以及个体报告对PEA刺激的偏差。接触个体和未接触个体组之间以及组内对气味强度的感知和反应偏差程度会有所不同;因此,有必要在化学刺激性的实验和工作场所研究中评估这些因素的影响。