OBJECTIVE: To conduct a literature review to determine the types of information that existing dermal pesticide monitoring data could provide for future pesticide exposure assessment in occupational epidemiology. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed on eight online databases. Two screening phases with predetermined criteria identified the qualifying literature. Standard information and dermal pesticide monitoring data were recorded and summarized from each qualifying study to assess its usefulness for future pesticide exposure assessment. RESULTS: A total of 31 farm studies qualified for review; task information was used to standardize all farm job(s) evaluated into 5 job groups: operators, applicators, mixer-loaders, field workers, and flaggers. When attempting to compare dermal exposure levels between studies, two types of variation were identified: (1) variation in study focus and reporting and 2) variation in exposure levels. The former variation type prevented exposure level comparisons between studies. Within studies, exposure levels were compared across body parts to identify that which had the highest measured exposure and to determine if results were similar in other studies that evaluated the same farm job. Using studies that measured exposure for multiple farm jobs, within study comparisons of total body exposure were performed to evaluate work factors. CONCLUSION: Future dermal pesticide exposure monitoring studies should standardize reporting procedures, as suggested in this review, to allow for more extensive dermal data comparisons. Body parts with highest measured levels of dermal exposure were identified by farm job, along with work factors to be further investigated as potential dermal pesticide exposure determinants for farm workers.
OBJECTIVE: To conduct a literature review to determine the types of information that existing dermal pesticide monitoring data could provide for future pesticide exposure assessment in occupational epidemiology. METHODS: A systematic literature search was performed on eight online databases. Two screening phases with predetermined criteria identified the qualifying literature. Standard information and dermal pesticide monitoring data were recorded and summarized from each qualifying study to assess its usefulness for future pesticide exposure assessment. RESULTS: A total of 31 farm studies qualified for review; task information was used to standardize all farm job(s) evaluated into 5 job groups: operators, applicators, mixer-loaders, field workers, and flaggers. When attempting to compare dermal exposure levels between studies, two types of variation were identified: (1) variation in study focus and reporting and 2) variation in exposure levels. The former variation type prevented exposure level comparisons between studies. Within studies, exposure levels were compared across body parts to identify that which had the highest measured exposure and to determine if results were similar in other studies that evaluated the same farm job. Using studies that measured exposure for multiple farm jobs, within study comparisons of total body exposure were performed to evaluate work factors. CONCLUSION: Future dermal pesticide exposure monitoring studies should standardize reporting procedures, as suggested in this review, to allow for more extensive dermal data comparisons. Body parts with highest measured levels of dermal exposure were identified by farm job, along with work factors to be further investigated as potential dermal pesticide exposure determinants for farm workers.
Authors: Morgane Bresson; Mathilde Bureau; Jérémie Le Goff; Yannick Lecluse; Elsa Robelot; Justine Delamare; Isabelle Baldi; Pierre Lebailly Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-04-11 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Mario Fargnoli; Mara Lombardi; Daniele Puri; Laura Casorri; Eva Masciarelli; Stefan Mandić-Rajčević; Claudio Colosio Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2019-01-23 Impact factor: 3.390