| Literature DB >> 31394819 |
Anita Jachowicz1, Katarzyna Majchrzycka2, Justyna Szulc3, Małgorzata Okrasa2, Beata Gutarowska3.
Abstract
Bioaerosol is a threat at workplaces, therefore the selection and safe use of filtering facepiece respirators (FFRs) is important in preventive activities. The aim of the study was to assess the survival of microorganisms on materials used for FFRs construction. The parameters for microorganism growth under model conditions were described using the Gompertz equation, model verification was also carried out using FFRs at the farmers' workplaces. We found that the factors determining a high survival of microorganisms were as follows: moisture corresponding to the conditions of use and storage of FFRs at workplaces, the presence of sweat and organic dust; inorganic dust and addition of biocide in nonwovens limited the growth of microorganisms, resulting in a shortening of the stationary growth phase and decreased cell numbers (5-6 log). Dust concentration at workplaces was higher than EU occupational exposure limit values and WHO recommendations for airborne particulate matter. Microbial contaminations of the air (103-104 CFU/m3), settled dust (104-106 CFU/g) and FFRs (105 CFU/4cm2) during the grain harvest were high, the main contamination being bacteria (actinomycetes, Pseudomonas fluorescens) and xerophilic fungi. A high correlation was found between the number of microorganisms and the weight of dust on FFRs (R2 = 0.93-0.96).Entities:
Keywords: dust; filtering facepiece respirators (FFRs); microorganisms; workplaces
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31394819 PMCID: PMC6719021 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph16162819
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Characteristics of filtering nonwovens.
| No. | Nonwoven Type | Thickness * (mm) | Surface Mass ** (g/m2) | Paraffin Oil Mist Penetration *** (%) | Air Flow Resistance **** (Pa) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | electret Polypropylene melt-blown nonwovens (PPQ) | 1.73 ± 0.13 | 75.8 ± 9.9 | 7.33 ± 1.91 | 200 ± 31 |
| 2. | composite electret Polypropylene melt-blown nonwovens (CPPQ) | 2.97 ± 0.18 | 135.3 ± 6.5 | 1.50 ± 0.17 | 361 ± 16 |
* Tested according to ISO 9073-2:1995 standard [32]; ** Tested according to EN 29073-1:1992 standard [33]; *** Tested according to EN 13274-7:2002 standard [34] at 20 mg/m3 and 95 L/min air flow rate; **** Tested according to EN 13274-3:2001 standard [35] at 95 L/min air flow rate.
Figure 1Daily changes of temperature and air humidity used for conditioning of filtering nonwovens.
Dust content in the nonwoven samples.
| Mass of Dust Deposited in the Nonwoven (mg/sample) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Dust from the Composting Plant | Dust from the Cement Plant | ||
| 2 min (deposition time) | 4 min (deposition time) | 2 min (deposition time) | 4 min (deposition time) |
| X: 24.6 | X: 51.2 | X: 33.6 | X: 60.6 |
| SD: 10.4 | SD:24.7 | SD: 10,9 | SD:15.9 |
Sample—79 cm2; X—mean; SD—standard deviation.
Workplace characteristics.
| No. | Study Location | Type of Work Performed at Workstation | Type of Sample Taken at Workstation | Microclimate Conditions |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | Cultivated field (2.7 ha), indoor working premises, Odolin, Lodz voivodeship, Poland (DMS: 52°10′44.271′′ N 19°36′27.669′′ E) | Air: | T: 385 | |
| Dust: | ||||
| Air: | T: 35.6 | |||
| Dust: | ||||
| 2. | Cultivated field (5.2 ha), indoor working premises, Wola Miłkowska, Lodz voivodeship, Poland (DMS: 51°48′42.452′′ N 18°36′15.331′′ E) | Air: | T: 33.2 | |
| Dust: | ||||
| Air: | T: 28.8 | |||
| Dust: |
T—Temperature [°C], RH—Relative humidity [%], W—Air flow velocity [m/s]; W, E, N, S—geographical location.
Figure 2The dynamics of microbial survival on the filtering nonwoven during the incubation depending on the factors studied: (a) B. subtilis; (b) S. aureus; (c) E. col; (d) C. albicans; (e) A. niger.
The influence of factors on the growth parameters of microorganisms on the filtering nonwoven.
| Microorganism | Growth Parameters | Factors | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| I | II | III | IV | V | VI | VII | VIII | IX | ||
|
| λstat (hours) | 22.28 | 18.17 | 32.64 | 24.53 | 19.01 | 10.86 | 14.57 | 18.37 | 2.61 |
| tstat (hours) | 5.93 | 7.15 | 8.08 | 2.95 | 5.71 | 6.22 | 6.10 | 7.43 | 3.98 | |
| Ymax (log CFU/4 cm2) | 3.03 | 3.24 | 1.28 | 1.01 | 2.40 | 3.03 | 2.93 | 2.50 | 0.57 | |
|
| λstat (hours) | 4.69 | 1,00 | 5.72 | 3.42 | 1.00 | 8.00 | 19.99 | 20.22 | 3.38 |
| tstat (hours) | 8.19 | 8.53 | 6.49 | 3.01 | 11.89 | 4.18 | 4.19 | 4.31 | 5.83 | |
| Ymax (log CFU/4 cm2) | 0.95 | 2.68 | 0.66 | 0.22 | 0.99 | 0.63 | 0.96 | 1.01 | 0.20 | |
|
| λstat (hours) | 4.21 | 10.34 | 2.45 | 0.34 | 7.21 | 30.62 | 1.36 | 3.77 | nb |
| tstat (hours) | 8.54 | 17.87 | 9.80 | 11.76 | 6.66 | 9.16 | 18.51 | 8.88 | nb | |
| Ymax (log CFU/4 cm2) | 0.92 | 0.52 | 0.16 | 1.39 | 0.61 | 0.54 | 0.72 | 0.44 | 0.21 | |
|
| λstat (hours) | 43.79 | 1.94 | 2.22 | 10.69 | 3.17 | 1.18 | 19.56 | 17.52 | 3.29 |
| tstat (hours) | 4.81 | 5.31 | 7.44 | 4.51 | 4.92 | 12.98 | 9.15 | 9.89 | 9.13 | |
| Ymax (log CFU/4 cm2) | 0.29 | 0.21 | 0.31 | 0.16 | 0.19 | 0.60 | 0.43 | 0.48 | 0.40 | |
|
| λstat (hours) | 46.77 | 7.81 | 1.18 | 1.91 | 3.56 | 0.59 | 16.76 | 4.92 | 4.13 |
| tstat (hours) | 4.18 | 12.41 | 11.35 | 8.37 | 4.66 | 8.68 | 9.24 | 10.63 | 4.57 | |
| Ymax (log CFU/4 cm2) | 0.72 | 0.70 | 0.19 | 0.21 | 0.18 | 0.61 | 0.58 | 0.49 | 0.07 | |
nb—not studied, bacteria decay after the inoculum was applied to the nonwoven, in which case the growth of bacteria S.aureus was not observed; I control-nonwoven PPQ; II temperature and humidity; III and IV cement plant, dust (lower and higher concentration); V and VI composting plant, dust (lower and higher concentration); VII acidic sweat; VIII alkaline sweat; IX biocide. Growth parameters: λstat—stationary phase duration; tstat—stationary phase beginning time; Ymax—cell increment.
Airborne dust mass concentrations at workplaces.
| Workplace | Sample Type | Airborne Dust Mass Concentrations Corresponding to Particle Size Fractions (mg/m3) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| PM1 | PM2.5 | PM4 | PM10 | PMtotal | ||
| 1A | X | M: 0.09 a | M: 0.09 a | M: 0.09 a | M: 0.13 b | M: 0.23 b |
| SD: 0.15 | SD: 0.16 | SD: 0.16 | SD: 0.27 | SD: 0.60 | ||
| Y | M: 2.47 a,* | M: 2.50 a,* | M: 2.63 a,* | M: 4.79 a,* | M: 10.62 a,* | |
| SD: 3.72 | SD: 3.75 | SD: 3.92 | SD: 6.98 | SD: 15.90 | ||
| 1B | X | M: 0.07 a | M: 0.07 a | M: 0.07 a | M: 0.08 a | M: 0.10 a |
| SD: 0.02 | SD: 0.02 | SD: 0.02 | SD: 0.04 | SD: 0.09 | ||
| Y | M: 2.53 a,* | M: 2.56 a,* | M: 2.70 a,* | M: 4.76 a,* | M: 10.25 a,* | |
| SD: 1.98 | SD: 2.00 | SD: 2.10 | SD: 3.65 | SD: 7.87 | ||
| 2A | X | M: 0.79 c | M: 0.80 c | M: 0.84 c | M: 1.57 d | M: 3.29 d |
| SD: 0.32 | SD: 0.32 | SD: 0.34 | SD: 0.68 | SD: 1.41 | ||
| Y | M: 1.93 a,* | M: 1.94 a,* | M: 2.03 a,* | M: 3.52 a,* | M: 7.22 a,* | |
| SD: 1.65 | SD: 1.66 | SD: 1.73 | SD: 2.83 | SD: 5.88 | ||
| 2B | X | M: 0.16 b | M: 0.16 b | M: 0.18 b | M: 0.31 c | M: 0.52 c |
| SD: 0.17 | SD: 0.18 | SD: 0.20 | SD: 0.40 | SD: 0.74 | ||
| Y | M: 2.01 a,* | M: 2.02 a,* | M: 2.05 a,* | M: 2.83 a,* | M: 6.05 a,* | |
| SD: 3.73 | SD: 3.74 | SD: 3.77 | SD: 4.76 | SD: 9.77 | ||
M—mean, SD—standard deviation, *—statistically significant differences between the mass concentration of a given dust fraction before work (X) and during their duration (Y) for a given work station (test, α = 0.05); a, b, c, d—statistically significant differences in concentration of a given dust fraction for various work stations (within the column for the same type of sample) are marked with different letters (Anova, α = 0.05, Tukey’s test, α = 0.05).
Microbiological contamination of air at workplaces.
| Workplace | Sample Type | Microorganism Number (CFU/m3) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bacteria | Fungi | ||
| 1A | X | M: 6.3 × 103 | M: 1.7 × 104 |
| SD: 1.2 × 103 | SD: 6.3 × 103 | ||
| Y | M: 2.5 × 104 * | M: 6.9 × 103 | |
| SD: 9.2 × 103 | SD: 2.5 × 103 | ||
| 1B | X | M: 1.6 × 104 | M: 4.5 × 103 |
| SD: 4.9 × 103 | SD: 7.4 × 102 | ||
| Y | M: 7.2 × 104 | M: 7.2 × 104 | |
| SD: 5.9 × 104 | SD: 5.9 × 104 | ||
| 2A | X | M: 5.4 × 103 | M: 6.6 × 103 |
| SD: 3.2 × 103 | SD: 5.8 × 103 | ||
| Y | M: 7.5 × 103 | M: 5.7 × 103 | |
| SD: 1.8 × 103 | SD: 2.0 × 103 | ||
| 2B | X | M: 8.0 × 103 | M: 3.9 × 103 |
| SD: 3.4 × 103 | SD: 1.3 × 103 | ||
| Y | M: 3.4 × 104 | M: 6.7 × 103 | |
| SD: 9.9 × 103 | SD: 3.8 × 103 | ||
M: mean; SD: standard deviation; * are significantly different in the number of microorganisms in the air samples before (X) and during working (Y) (test ANOVA, α = 0.05).
The number of microorganisms in dust samples settled at workplaces.
| Marked Microorganisms | Microorganism Number (CFU/g) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| A/I | A/II | B/III | |
| Bacteria | M: 3.1 × 106 a | M: 3.3 × 106 a | M: 3.1 × 106 a |
| SD: 1.8 × 106 | SD: 5.7 × 105 | SD: 5.4 × 105 | |
| Actinomycetes | M: 2.7 × 106 a | M: 2.7 × 106 a | M: 2.0 × 106 a |
| SD: 1.3 × 106 | SD: 2.0 × 106 | SD: 5.2 × 105 | |
| M: 7.4 × 104 a | M: 3.8 × 104 b | M: 6.7 × 104 a,b | |
| SD: 1.3 × 104 | SD: 1.9 × 104 | SD: 3.5 × 104 | |
|
| M: 4.4 × 106 a | M: 4.5 × 106 a | M: 4.1 × 106 a |
| SD: 1.4 × 106 | SD: 1.3 × 106 | SD: 4.7 × 105 | |
| Fungi | M: 1.2 × 105 a | M: 2.8 × 104 b | M: 8.1 × 104 b |
| SD: 3.7 × 104 | SD: 1.5 × 104 | SD: 3.5 × 104 | |
| Xerophilic Fungi | M: 2.0 × 105 a | M: 3.4 × 104 b | M: 1.1 × 105 a |
| SD: 8.1 × 104 | SD: 1.4 × 104 | SD: 4.7 × 104 | |
M: mean; SD: standard deviation; a, b: means with the same letter in the same row are not significantly different (test ANOVA, α = 0,05); * Mannitol-Positive and Mannitol-Negative Staphylococci spp.
Figure 3Dynamics of changes in the number of microorganisms and the amount of dust on the FFRs during their use at the combine operator’s workplaces.
Figure 4Logarithm dependence of the number of microorganisms and the mass of dust accumulated on FFRs (a) bacteria and (b) fungi.