Literature DB >> 25858432

Comparison and Evaluation of Multiple Users' Usage of the Exposure and Risk Tool: Stoffenmanager 5.1.

Hanna E Landberg1, Peter Berg2, Lennart Andersson2, Ulf Bergendorf3, Jan-Eric Karlsson3, Håkan Westberg2, Håkan Tinnerberg3.   

Abstract

Stoffenmanager is an exposure and risk assessment tool that has a control banding part, with risk bands as outcome and a quantitative exposure assessment part, with the 90th percentile of the predicted exposure as a default outcome. The main aim of the study was to investigate whether multiple users of Stoffenmanager came to the same result when modelling the same scenarios. Other aims were to investigate the differences between outcomes of the control banding part with the measured risk quota and to evaluate the conservatism of the tool by testing whether the 90th percentiles are above the measured median exposures. We investigated airborne exposures at companies in four different types of industry: wood, printing, metal foundry, and spray painting. Three scenarios were modelled and measured, when possible, at each company. When modelled, 13 users visited each company on the same occasion creating individual assessments. Consensus assessments were also modelled for each scenario by six occupational hygienists. The multiple users' outcomes were often spread over two risk bands in the control banding part, and the differences in the quantitative exposure outcomes for the highest and lowest assessments per scenario varied between a factor 2 and 100. Four parameters were difficult for the users to assess and had a large impact on the outcome: type of task, breathing zone, personal protection, and control measures. Only two scenarios had a higher measured risk quota than predicted by the control banding part, also two scenarios had slightly higher measured median exposure value than modelled consensus in the quantitative exposure assessment part. Hence, the variability between users was large but the model performed well.
© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Occupational Hygiene Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  REACH; exposure assessment; exposure modelling; occupational exposure; risk assessment

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25858432     DOI: 10.1093/annhyg/mev027

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Occup Hyg        ISSN: 0003-4878


  6 in total

1.  Evaluation of Exposure Assessment Tools under REACH: Part II-Higher Tier Tools.

Authors:  Eun Gyung Lee; Judith Lamb; Nenad Savic; Ioannis Basinas; Bojan Gasic; Christian Jung; Michael L Kashon; Jongwoon Kim; Martin Tischer; Martie van Tongeren; David Vernez; Martin Harper
Journal:  Ann Work Expo Health       Date:  2019-02-16       Impact factor: 2.179

2.  Development and application of a fuzzy occupational health risk assessment model in the healthcare industry.

Authors:  Mohammad Hossein Chalak; Amin Kahani; Ghasem Bahramiazar; Zohreh Marashi; Tsvetan Ivanov Popov; Sakineh Dadipoor; Omran Ahmadi
Journal:  Med Lav       Date:  2022-08-25       Impact factor: 2.244

Review 3.  Validity of Tier 1 Modelling Tools and Impacts on Exposure Assessments within REACH Registrations-ETEAM Project, Validation Studies and Consequences.

Authors:  Urs Schlueter; Martin Tischer
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2020-06-26       Impact factor: 3.390

Review 4.  Evaluating the Theoretical Background of STOFFENMANAGER® and the Advanced REACH Tool.

Authors:  Antti Joonas Koivisto; Michael Jayjock; Kaarle J Hämeri; Markku Kulmala; Patrick Van Sprang; Mingzhou Yu; Brandon E Boor; Tareq Hussein; Ismo K Koponen; Jakob Löndahl; Lidia Morawska; John C Little; Susan Arnold
Journal:  Ann Work Expo Health       Date:  2022-04-22       Impact factor: 2.779

Review 5.  Exposure modelling in Europe: how to pave the road for the future as part of the European Exposure Science Strategy 2020-2030.

Authors:  Urs Schlüter; Jessica Meyer; Andreas Ahrens; Francesca Borghi; Frédéric Clerc; Christiaan Delmaar; Antonio Di Guardo; Tatsiana Dudzina; Peter Fantke; Wouter Fransman; Stefan Hahn; Henri Heussen; Christian Jung; Joonas Koivisto; Dorothea Koppisch; Alicia Paini; Nenad Savic; Andrea Spinazzè; Maryam Zare Jeddi; Natalie von Goetz
Journal:  J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol       Date:  2022-08-02       Impact factor: 6.371

6.  How to Obtain a Reliable Estimate of Occupational Exposure? Review and Discussion of Models' Reliability.

Authors:  Andrea Spinazzè; Francesca Borghi; Davide Campagnolo; Sabrina Rovelli; Marta Keller; Giacomo Fanti; Andrea Cattaneo; Domenico Maria Cavallo
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2019-08-02       Impact factor: 3.390

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.