Tools for regulatory assessment of occupational exposure: development and challenges

REACH (Registration, Evaluation and Authorization of CHemicals) requires improved exposure models that can be incorporated into screening tools and refined assessment tools. These are referred to as tier 1 and 2 models, respectively. There are a number of candidate in tier 1 models that could be used with REACH. Tier 2 models, producing robust and realistic exposure assessments, are currently not available. A research programme is proposed in this paper that will result in a new, advanced exposure assessment tool for REACH. In addition, issues related to variability and uncertainty are discussed briefly, and some examples of tier 1 screening tools are presented. The proposed framework for the tier 2 tool is based on a Bayesian approach, and makes full use of mechanistically modelled estimates and any relevant measurements of exposure. The new approach will preclude the necessity to conduct of case-by-case exposure measurements for each chemical and scenario, since the system will allow for the use of analogous exposure data from relatively comparable scenarios. The development of the new approach requires substantial effort in the area of mechanistic modelling, database development and Bayesian statistical techniques. In this paper, the data gaps and areas for future research are identified to help realise and further improve this type of approach within REACH. A structured data collection and storage system is a central element of the research programme and the availability of this type of tool may also facilitate the sharing of exposure data down and up the supply chain. In addition, new data that are stored according to the proposed structure could enable the validation of any exposure model and thus this programme enhances the exposure assessment field as a whole.

[1]  Dennis A. Morgan.  Occupational Exposure Databases and Their Application for the Next Millennium: Symposium Framework and Workshop Introduction , 2001 .

[2]  S M Rappaport,et al.  An exposure-assessments strategy accounting for within- and between-worker sources of variability. , 1995, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[3]  Sudipto Banerjee,et al.  Rating Exposure Control Using Bayesian Decision Analysis , 2006, Journal of occupational and environmental hygiene.

[4]  H Kromhout,et al.  Temporal, personal and spatial variability in dermal exposure. , 2001, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[5]  S. Maidment,et al.  An introduction to a UK scheme to help small firms control health risks from chemicals. , 1998, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[6]  J J van Hemmen,et al.  Determinants of dermal exposure relevant for exposure modelling in regulatory risk assessment. , 2003, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[7]  R. M. Russell,et al.  An introduction to a UK scheme to help small firms control health risks from chemicals , 1998 .

[8]  J. Hammitt,et al.  The Expected Value of Information and the Probability of Surprise , 1999 .

[9]  K Teschke,et al.  Studying the determinants of exposure: a review of methods. , 1999, American Industrial Hygiene Association journal.

[10]  H Kromhout,et al.  Accuracy of a semiquantitative method for Dermal Exposure Assessment (DREAM) , 2005, Occupational and Environmental Medicine.

[11]  Hans Marquart,et al.  RISKOFDERM: risk assessment of occupational dermal exposure to chemicals. An introduction to a series of papers on the development of a toolkit. , 2003, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[12]  J Tickner,et al.  Evaluation and further development of EASE model 2.0. , 2005, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[13]  S. Semple,et al.  A training exercise in subjectively estimating inhalation exposures. , 2001, Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health.

[14]  C. Money,et al.  Improved use of workplace exposure data in the regulatory risk assessment of chemicals within Europe. , 2002, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[15]  Rachael M. Jones,et al.  Evaluation of COSHH Essentials for vapor degreasing and bag filling operations. , 2006, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[16]  John W. Cherrie,et al.  Variability and uncertainty in chemical exposures for regulatory risk assessments , 2004 .

[17]  R. Vermeulen,et al.  DREAM: a method for semi-quantitative dermal exposure assessment. , 2003, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[18]  P. Wild,et al.  Combining expert ratings and exposure measurements: a random effect paradigm. , 2002, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[19]  E A Eisen,et al.  Measuring exposure for the epidemiologic study of acute effects. , 1992, American journal of industrial medicine.

[20]  Erik Tielemans,et al.  Excluding exposure data of very poor quality is a core principle for regulatory risk assessment. , 2002, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[21]  John W Cherrie,et al.  Comparison of measured dermal dust exposures with predicted exposures given by the EASE expert system. , 2005, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[22]  R Stamm,et al.  MEGA-database: one million data since 1972. , 2001, Applied occupational and environmental hygiene.

[23]  H Kromhout,et al.  An assessment of dermal exposure to semi-synthetic metal working fluids by different methods to group workers for an epidemiological study on dermatitis , 2005, Occupational and Environmental Medicine.

[24]  H Kromhout,et al.  Individual-based and group-based occupational exposure assessment: some equations to evaluate different strategies. , 1998, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[25]  Hans Kromhout,et al.  Estimates of individual dose from current measurements of exposure. , 1996 .

[26]  H Kromhout,et al.  Conceptual model for assessment of dermal exposure. , 1999, Occupational and environmental medicine.

[27]  R C Spear,et al.  Environmental versus analytical variability in exposure measurements. , 1991, American Industrial Hygiene Association journal.

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

[29]  E. Symanski,et al.  A comprehensive evaluation of within- and between-worker components of occupational exposure to chemical agents. , 1993, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[30]  Paul Evans,et al.  Evaluation of COSHH Essentials for vapour degreasing and bag-filling operations. , 2006, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[31]  Kimberly M. Thompson.  Developing Univariate Distributions from Data for Risk Analysis , 1999 .

[32]  Steve Bailey,et al.  Evaluation of the utility and reliability of COSHH Essentials. , 2006, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[33]  James H Vincent,et al.  Expert judgment and occupational hygiene: application to aerosol speciation in the nickel primary production industry. , 2003, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[34]  Erik Tielemans,et al.  Development of an Exposure Control Efficiency Library (ECEL) , 2006 .

[35]  R. Vincent,et al.  COLCHIC-occupational exposure to chemical agents database: current content and development perspectives. , 2001, Applied occupational and environmental hygiene.

[36]  Joop J. van Hemmen.  Dermal Exposure to Chemicals , 2004 .

[37]  Mark J. Nieuwenhuijsen,et al.  Human exposure modelling for chemical risk assessment: a review of current approaches and research and policy implications , 2006 .

[38]  M Tischer,et al.  Evaluation of the HSE COSHH Essentials exposure predictive model on the basis of BAuA field studies and existing substances exposure data. , 2003, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[39]  H. Marquart,et al.  A proposal for evaluation of exposure data. , 2002, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[40]  N Duan,et al.  Can long-term exposure distributions be predicted from short-term measurements? , 1994, Risk analysis : an official publication of the Society for Risk Analysis.

[41]  John W Cherrie,et al.  The validity of the EASE expert system for inhalation exposures. , 2005, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[42]  Hans Kromhout,et al.  Variability of task-based dermal exposure measurements from a variety of workplaces. , 2004, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[43]  Max Henrion,et al.  Uncertainty: A Guide to Dealing with Uncertainty in Quantitative Risk and Policy Analysis , 1990 .

[44]  A. I. Shlyakhter,et al.  An improved framework for uncertainty analysis: Accounting for unsuspected errors , 1994 .

[45]  M E Ginevan,et al.  Human Exposure Assessment I: Understanding the Uncertainties , 1992, Toxicology and industrial health.

[46]  Robert L. Winkler,et al.  Combining Probability Distributions From Experts in Risk Analysis , 1999 .

[47]  W. Chan,et al.  A meta-analytic approach for characterizing the within-worker and between-worker sources of variation in occupational exposure. , 2006, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

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

[49]  T. Schneider,et al.  Validation of a New Method for Structured Subjective Assessment of Past Concentrations , 1999 .

[50]  Thomas Schneider,et al.  Evaluation of Exposure Information , 1991 .

[51]  H Marquart,et al.  Occupational exposure information needs for regulatory risk assessment of existing chemicals. , 2001, Applied occupational and environmental hygiene.

[52]  Christine Northage.  EASEing into the future. , 2005, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[53]  G. Ramachandran,et al.  A Bayesian approach to retrospective exposure assessment. , 1999, Applied occupational and environmental hygiene.

[54]  Erik Olsen,et al.  European Proposal for Core Information for the Storage and Exchange of Workplace Exposure Measurements on Chemical Agents , 1997 .

[55]  D K Burns,et al.  The HSE National Exposure Database--(NEDB). , 1989, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[56]  M B Schenker,et al.  Algorithms for estimating personal exposures to chemical agents in the Semiconductor Health Study. , 1995, American journal of industrial medicine.

[57]  I Hertz-Picciotto,et al.  Epidemiology and quantitative risk assessment: a bridge from science to policy. , 1995, American journal of public health.