A comprehensive evaluation of within- and between-worker components of occupational exposure to chemical agents.

A database of approximately 20,000 chemical exposures has been constructed in close co-operation between the School of Public Health of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and the Department of Air Pollution of the Wageningen Agricultural University. A special feature of this database is that only multiple measurements of exposure from the same workers were included. This enabled estimation of within- and between-worker variance components of occupational exposure to chemical agents throughout industry. Most of the groups were not uniformly exposed as is generally assumed by occupational hygienists. In fact only 42 out of a total of 165 groups (25%), based on job title and factory, had 95% of individual mean exposures within a two-fold range. On the contrary, about 30% of the groups had 95% of individual mean exposures in a range which was greater than 10-fold. Environmental and production factors were shown to have distinct influences on the within-worker (day-to-day) variability, but not on the between-worker variability. Groups working outdoors and those working without local exhaust ventilation showed more day-to-day variability than groups working indoors and those working with local exhaust ventilation. Groups consisting of mobile workers, those working with an intermittent process and those where the source of contamination was either local or mobile also showed great day-to-day variability. In a multivariate regression model, environment (indoors-outdoors) and type of process (continuous-intermittent) explained 41% of the variability in the within-worker component of variance. Another model, in which only type of process (continuous-intermittent) had a significant effect, explained only 13% of the variability in the between-worker component of variance.

[1]  Ronald Christensen,et al.  Case-deletion diagnostics for mixed models , 1992 .

[2]  Steve Selvin,et al.  Benzene Exposure in the Petroleum Refining Industry , 1987 .

[3]  H. Kromhout,et al.  Agreement between qualitative exposure estimates and quantitative exposure measurements. , 1987, American journal of industrial medicine.

[4]  H Kromhout,et al.  Variation of exposure between workers in homogeneous exposure groups. , 1993, American Industrial Hygiene Association journal.

[5]  T. Smid,et al.  Exposure to dust, endotoxins, and fungi in the animal feed industry. , 1992, American Industrial Hygiene Association journal.

[6]  S. Rappaport Selection of the Measures of Exposure for Epidemiology Studies , 1991 .

[7]  S Selvin,et al.  The effect of autocorrelation on the estimation of workers' daily exposures. , 1989, American Industrial Hygiene Association journal.

[8]  K. A. Busch,et al.  Exposure measurement action level and occupational environmental variability , 1975 .

[9]  J. Wal,et al.  Dust control measures in Dutch brickworks. , 1990 .

[10]  R C Spear,et al.  Variability in protection afforded by half-mask respirators against styrene exposure in the field. , 1990, American Industrial Hygiene Association journal.

[11]  S. Selvin,et al.  THE INFLUENCE OF EXPOSURE VARIABILITY ON DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIPS , 1988 .

[12]  R. Bos,et al.  Mutagens in urine of non-smoking and smoking workers in an aircraft tyre retreading plant. Skin exposure as a causal factor? , 1989, Mutation research.

[13]  S. Rappaport,et al.  Assessment of long-term exposures to toxic substances in air. , 1991, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[14]  L W Whitehead,et al.  The influence of task and location on solvent exposures in a printing plant. , 1988, American Industrial Hygiene Association journal.

[15]  G. Lindstedt,et al.  Individual mercury exposure of chloralkali workers and its relation to blood and urinary mercury levels. , 1979, Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health.

[16]  T. Smid,et al.  Lung function of welders of zinc-coated mild steel: cross-sectional analysis and changes over five consecutive work shifts. , 1989, American journal of industrial medicine.

[17]  D. Mage Exposure variability in the workplace: its implications for the assessment of compliance. , 1995, American Industrial Hygiene Association journal.

[18]  L. Ryan,et al.  ASSESSING NORMALITY IN RANDOM EFFECTS MODELS , 1989 .

[19]  T. Smid,et al.  Relationship of airborne microorganisms with the lung function and leucocyte levels of workers with a history of humidifier fever. , 1990, Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health.

[20]  J. V. van Hemmen,et al.  Exposure to styrene and health complaints in the Dutch glass-reinforced plastics industry. , 1992, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[21]  S. Selvin,et al.  A measure of goodness-of-fit for the lognormal model applied to occupational exposures. , 1991, American Industrial Hygiene Association journal.

[22]  N. Paik,et al.  A comparison of iron oxide fume inside and outside of welding helmets. , 1985, American Industrial Hygiene Association journal.