Gamola Z Fortenberry1, John Beckman2, Abby Schwartz3, Joanne Bonnar Prado4, Lucia S Graham5, Sheila Higgins6, Michelle Lackovic7, Prakash Mulay8, Heidi Bojes9, Justin Waltz10, Yvette Mitchell11, Kathy Leinenkugel12, Michel S Oriel5, Elizabeth Evans13, Geoffrey M Calvert14. 1. Division of Surveillance, Hazard Evaluations, and Field Studies, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Cincinnati, OH, USA. 2. Public Health Institute, Oakland, CA, USA; California Department of Public Health, Richmond, CA, USA. 3. Michigan Department of Health and Human Services, Lansing, MI, USA. 4. Washington State Department of Health, Olympia, WA, USA. 5. California Department of Pesticide Regulation, Sacramento, CA, USA. 6. North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services, Raleigh, NC, USA. 7. Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals, New Orleans, LA, USA. 8. Florida Department of Health, Tallahassee, FL, USA. 9. Texas Department of State Health Services, Austin, TX, USA. 10. Oregon Health Authority, Portland, OR, USA. 11. New York State Department of Health, Albany, NY, USA. 12. Iowa Department of Public Health, Des Moines, IA, USA. 13. Office of Pesticide Programs, United States Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., USA. 14. Division of Surveillance, Hazard Evaluations, and Field Studies, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Cincinnati, OH, USA. Electronic address: jac6@cdc.gov.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Paraquat and diquat are among the most commonly used herbicides in the world. OBJECTIVES: Determine the magnitude, characteristics, and root causes for acute paraquat- and diquat-related illnesses in the US METHODS: Illnesses associated with paraquat or diquat exposure occurring from 1998 through 2011 were identified from the Sentinel Event Notification System for Occupational Risks (SENSOR)-Pesticides Program, the California Department of Pesticide Regulation (CDPR) Pesticide Illness Surveillance Program (PISP), and the Incident Data System (IDS). Cases identified by the National Poison Data System (NPDS) were reviewed for the years 1998-2003 and 2006-2013. RESULTS: A total of 300 paraquat- and 144 diquat-related acute illnesses were identified by SENSOR, PISP, and IDS. NPDS identified 693 paraquat- and 2128 diquat-related acute illnesses. In SENSOR/PISP/IDS, illnesses were commonly low severity (paraquat=41%; diquat=81%); however, SENSOR/PISP/IDS identified 24 deaths caused by paraquat and 5 deaths associated with diquat. Nineteen paraquat-related deaths were due to ingestion, seven of which were unintentional, often due to improper storage in beverage bottles. In SENSOR/PISP/IDS, paraquat and diquat-related acute illnesses were work-related in 68% (n=203) and 29% (n=42) of cases, respectively. When herbicide application site was known, the vast majority of acute paraquat-related illnesses (81%) arose from agricultural applications. Common root causes of illness were failure to use adequate personal protective equipment (PPE), application equipment failure, and spill/splash of herbicide. CONCLUSIONS: Although the magnitude of acute paraquat/diquat-related illnesses was relatively low, several fatalities were identified. Many illnesses could be prevented through stricter compliance with label requirements (e.g. ensuring proper herbicide storage and PPE use), and through enhanced training of certified applicators. Published by Elsevier Inc.
BACKGROUND:Paraquat and diquat are among the most commonly used herbicides in the world. OBJECTIVES: Determine the magnitude, characteristics, and root causes for acute paraquat- and diquat-related illnesses in the US METHODS: Illnesses associated with paraquat or diquat exposure occurring from 1998 through 2011 were identified from the Sentinel Event Notification System for Occupational Risks (SENSOR)-Pesticides Program, the California Department of Pesticide Regulation (CDPR) Pesticide Illness Surveillance Program (PISP), and the Incident Data System (IDS). Cases identified by the National Poison Data System (NPDS) were reviewed for the years 1998-2003 and 2006-2013. RESULTS: A total of 300 paraquat- and 144 diquat-related acute illnesses were identified by SENSOR, PISP, and IDS. NPDS identified 693 paraquat- and 2128 diquat-related acute illnesses. In SENSOR/PISP/IDS, illnesses were commonly low severity (paraquat=41%; diquat=81%); however, SENSOR/PISP/IDS identified 24 deaths caused by paraquat and 5 deaths associated with diquat. Nineteen paraquat-related deaths were due to ingestion, seven of which were unintentional, often due to improper storage in beverage bottles. In SENSOR/PISP/IDS, paraquat and diquat-related acute illnesses were work-related in 68% (n=203) and 29% (n=42) of cases, respectively. When herbicide application site was known, the vast majority of acute paraquat-related illnesses (81%) arose from agricultural applications. Common root causes of illness were failure to use adequate personal protective equipment (PPE), application equipment failure, and spill/splash of herbicide. CONCLUSIONS: Although the magnitude of acute paraquat/diquat-related illnesses was relatively low, several fatalities were identified. Many illnesses could be prevented through stricter compliance with label requirements (e.g. ensuring proper herbicide storage and PPE use), and through enhanced training of certified applicators. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Authors: Alvin C Bronstein; Daniel A Spyker; Louis R Cantilena; Barry H Rumack; Richard C Dart Journal: Clin Toxicol (Phila) Date: 2012-12 Impact factor: 4.467
Authors: James B Mowry; Daniel A Spyker; Louis R Cantilena; Naya McMillan; Marsha Ford Journal: Clin Toxicol (Phila) Date: 2014-12 Impact factor: 4.467
Authors: L Perry; R D Adams; A R Bennett; D J Lupton; G Jackson; A M Good; S H L Thomas; J A Vale; J P Thompson; D N Bateman; M Eddleston Journal: Clin Toxicol (Phila) Date: 2014-04-16 Impact factor: 4.467
Authors: Martin F Wilks; Ravindra Fernando; P L Ariyananda; Michael Eddleston; David J Berry; John A Tomenson; Nicholas A Buckley; Shaluka Jayamanne; David Gunnell; Andrew Dawson Journal: PLoS Med Date: 2008-02 Impact factor: 11.069
Authors: Cheng Gao; Qiaoxian Huang; Qingping Lan; Yu Feng; Fan Tang; Maggie P M Hoi; Jianxiang Zhang; Simon M Y Lee; Ruibing Wang Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2018-07-27 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Francesca Macii; Rebecca Detti; Francesca Rita Bloise; Stefania Giannarelli; Tarita Biver Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-03-02 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Charles Benbrook; Melissa J Perry; Fiorella Belpoggi; Philip J Landrigan; Michelle Perro; Daniele Mandrioli; Michael N Antoniou; Paul Winchester; Robin Mesnage Journal: Environ Health Date: 2021-08-03 Impact factor: 5.984