Sensitivity Analysis, Dominant Factors, and Robustness of the ECETOC TRA v3, Stoffenmanager 4.5, and ART 1.5 Occupational Exposure Models

Occupational exposure modeling is widely used in the context of the E.U. regulation on the registration, evaluation, authorization, and restriction of chemicals (REACH). First tier tools, such as European Centre for Ecotoxicology and TOxicology of Chemicals (ECETOC) targeted risk assessment (TRA) or Stoffenmanager, are used to screen a wide range of substances. Those of concern are investigated further using second tier tools, e.g., Advanced REACH Tool (ART). Local sensitivity analysis (SA) methods are used here to determine dominant factors for three models commonly used within the REACH framework: ECETOC TRA v3, Stoffenmanager 4.5, and ART 1.5. Based on the results of the SA, the robustness of the models is assessed. For ECETOC, the process category (PROC) is the most important factor. A failure to identify the correct PROC has severe consequences for the exposure estimate. Stoffenmanager is the most balanced model and decision making uncertainties in one modifying factor are less severe in Stoffenmanager. ART requires a careful evaluation of the decisions in the source compartment since it constitutes ∼75% of the total exposure range, which corresponds to an exposure estimate of 20-22 orders of magnitude. Our results indicate that there is a trade off between accuracy and precision of the models. Previous studies suggested that ART may lead to more accurate results in well-documented exposure situations. However, the choice of the adequate model should ultimately be determined by the quality of the available exposure data: if the practitioner is uncertain concerning two or more decisions in the entry parameters, Stoffenmanager may be more robust than ART.

[1]  H. Kromhout,et al.  Cross-validation and refinement of the Stoffenmanager as a first tier exposure assessment tool for REACH , 2009, Occupational and Environmental Medicine.

[2]  Hans Kromhout,et al.  Reliability of the Advanced REACH Tool (ART). , 2014, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[3]  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.

[4]  Derk Brouwer,et al.  Advanced REACH Tool: development and application of the substance emission potential modifying factor. , 2011, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[5]  X. Y. Sun,et al.  Three complementary methods for sensitivity analysis of a water quality model , 2012, Environ. Model. Softw..

[6]  Wouter Fransman,et al.  Use of the MEGA exposure database for the validation of the Stoffenmanager model. , 2012, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[7]  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.

[8]  Max D. Morris,et al.  Factorial sampling plans for preliminary computational experiments , 1991 .

[9]  H Marquart,et al.  Use of read-across and tiered exposure assessment in risk assessment under REACH--a case study on a phase-in substance. , 2010, Regulatory toxicology and pharmacology : RTP.

[10]  Sławomir Czerczak,et al.  Evaluation of the TRA ECETOC model for inhalation workplace exposure to different organic solvents for selected process categories , 2011, International journal of occupational medicine and environmental health.

[11]  Sławomir Czerczak,et al.  Assessment of exposure to TDI and MDI during polyurethane foam production in Poland using integrated theoretical and experimental data. , 2012, Environmental toxicology and pharmacology.

[12]  E. R. Cohen An Introduction to Error Analysis: The Study of Uncertainties in Physical Measurements , 1998 .

[13]  M A Jayjock,et al.  A proposal for improving the role of exposure modeling in risk assessment. , 1993, American Industrial Hygiene Association journal.

[14]  Renaud Persoons,et al.  Etude des méthodes et modèles de caractérisation de l'exposition atmosphérique aux polluants chimiques pour l'évaluation des risques sanitaires , 2011 .

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

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

[17]  Erik Tielemans,et al.  'Stoffenmanager', a web-based control banding tool using an exposure process model. , 2008, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[18]  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.

[19]  S. Standard GUIDE TO THE EXPRESSION OF UNCERTAINTY IN MEASUREMENT , 2006 .

[20]  J W Cherrie,et al.  Are task-based exposure levels a valuable index of exposure for epidemiology? , 1996, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[21]  Hans Kromhout,et al.  Validation of the inhalable dust algorithm of the Advanced REACH Tool using a dataset from the pharmaceutical industry. , 2011, Journal of environmental monitoring : JEM.

[22]  Hans Kromhout,et al.  Advanced Reach Tool (ART): development of the mechanistic model. , 2011, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[23]  C B Keil,et al.  A tiered approach to deterministic models for indoor air exposures. , 2000, Applied occupational and environmental hygiene.

[24]  Hans Kromhout,et al.  The Advanced REACH Tool (ART): incorporation of an exposure measurement database. , 2013, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[25]  S Bredendiek-Kämper,et al.  Do EASE scenarios fit workplace reality? A validation study of the EASE model. Estimation and Assessment of Substance Exposure. , 2001, Applied occupational and environmental hygiene.

[26]  Hans Kromhout,et al.  Advanced REACH Tool (ART): overview of version 1.0 and research needs. , 2011, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[27]  John Kingston,et al.  The development of the EASE model. , 2005, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[28]  Trevor Ogden,et al.  Progress on ART--an exposure modelling tool for REACH. , 2011, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[29]  Wouter Fransman,et al.  Revisiting the effect of room size and general ventilation on the relationship between near- and far-field air concentrations. , 2011, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[30]  Hans Kromhout,et al.  Advanced REACH Tool (ART): calibration of the mechanistic model. , 2011, Journal of environmental monitoring : JEM.

[31]  Erik Tielemans,et al.  Classification of occupational activities for assessment of inhalation exposure. , 2011, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[32]  C D Money,et al.  European experiences in the development of approaches for the successful control of workplace health risks. , 2003, The Annals of occupational hygiene.

[33]  P. Sottas,et al.  An empirical hierarchical Bayesian unification of occupational exposure assessment methods , 2009, Statistics in medicine.

[34]  Wouter Fransman,et al.  Stoffenmanager exposure model: development of a quantitative algorithm. , 2008, The Annals of occupational hygiene.