Literature DB >> 28355454

A Study of the Validity of Two Exposure Assessment Tools: Stoffenmanager and the Advanced REACH Tool.

Hanna E Landberg1, Anna Axmon1, Håkan Westberg2, Håkan Tinnerberg1.   

Abstract

The use of exposure modelling tools for estimating chemical airborne exposure has increased since the European Union's REACH legislation for safe use of industrial chemicals came into force. Two tools that European Chemicals Agency recommends are Stoffenmanager® and the Advanced REACH Tool (ART). The aim of this study was to investigate the validity of these two exposure modelling tools by comparing the lack of agreement between estimated and measured exposure. We examined the airborne chemical exposure at companies in seven different types of industries: wood, printing, foundry, spray painting, flour milling, chemical industry, and plastic moulding industry. The inhalable exposure of liquids or powders at two to three situations at each company was modelled with both tools and measured. To study the validity of the tools, the mean differences and precisions (lack of agreement) of exposures from both situations handling liquids and powders were calculated by using the 50th percentile outcome of the tools and the geometric mean of the measured exposure (all data were ln transformed). For Stoffenmanager, the mean difference and precision of the situations concerning liquids were 0.22 ± 1.0 and for powders -0.024 ± 0.66. It was also shown that Stoffenmanager overestimated low exposures and underestimated high exposures. Stoffenmanager showed higher agreement with the measured exposure in the wood and flour mill industries than in foundry and the plastic moulding industry. For ART, the mean difference and precision of liquids were -0.55 ± 0.88 and for powders -1.4 ± 1.6. ART showed lower agreement with the measured exposure in the wood industry.
© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Occupational Hygiene Society.

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

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28355454     DOI: 10.1093/annweh/wxx008

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Work Expo Health        ISSN: 2398-7308            Impact factor:   2.179


  5 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  Theoretical Background of Occupational-Exposure Models-Report of an Expert Workshop of the ISES Europe Working Group "Exposure Models".

Authors:  Urs Schlüter; Susan Arnold; Francesca Borghi; John Cherrie; Wouter Fransman; Henri Heussen; Michael Jayjock; Keld Alstrup Jensen; Joonas Koivisto; Dorothea Koppisch; Jessica Meyer; Andrea Spinazzè; Celia Tanarro; Steven Verpaele; Natalie von Goetz
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-01-22       Impact factor: 3.390

Review 3.  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

4.  Comparison between Communicated and Calculated Exposure Estimates Obtained through Three Modeling Tools.

Authors:  Andrea Spinazzè; Francesca Borghi; Daniele Magni; Costanza Rovida; Monica Locatelli; Andrea Cattaneo; Domenico Maria Cavallo
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2020-06-11       Impact factor: 3.390

5.  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

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.