Occupational exposure records

Occupational exposures and the study with human volunteers indicate that exposures at low concentrations cause headaches and signs of central nervous system depression. No headaches were reported and no equilibrium disturbances were measured during occupational exposures of healthy workers to Otto Fuel II (measured as PGDN) at concentrations <0.22 ppm (average of approximately 0.06 ppm) for periods of 30-60 min, although subtle changes in eye movements were recorded (Horvath et al. 1981). In a study with healthy but previously unexposed male volunteers, the threshold for odor detection was 0.2 ppm (Stewart et al. 1974). Mild headaches were reported in one of three subjects after a 6-h exposure at 0.1 ppm, in two of three subjects after a 2-h exposure at 0.2 ppm, and in one of three subjects after a 1-h exposure at 0.5 ppm. Severe headaches occurred after an 8-h exposure at 0.2... 

The only information available for humans exposed to chlordecone pertains to a study of intermediate-to-chronic occupational exposures (exact durations not recorded) of one group of individuals employed at a facility in Hopewell, Virginia. Chlordecone was manufactured in this facility for 21--22 months because of poor hygiene at the facility, exposure by all routes was likely. In addition, concomitant exposure to a precursor was possible. Several studies have been published to describe the toxicity in this human population (Cannon et al. 1978 Taylor 1982, 1985), and results of these studies will be considered here. These results pertain to the chronic-duration exposure also. No deaths were reported (Cannon et al. 1978 Taylor et al. 1978). Skeletal muscle biopsy was conducted on six workers who experienced adverse neurological clinical signs (such as tremors) as well as muscle weakness and incoordination (Martinez et al. 1978). Abnormal histological and biochemical indices were revealed in this tissue. Joint pain was also reported (Taylor 1982, 1985). 

If an individual performs both radiographic procedures (i.e., procedures without use of a protective apron) and fluoroscopic procedures i.e., procedures with the use of a protective apron) during a given monitoring period, there may be no practical way to determine precisely the relative contribution each type of procedure made to the total /fp(lO) value recorded by a personal monitor. However, occupational exposure during radiographic procedures should be very low, since the worker is at a relatively large distance from the x-ray source and most often i.e., except for use of mobile x-ray systems) in a protective cubicle. 

Occupational medical records should record and document occupationally related medical information of all types (e.g., medical examinations, visits to medical facilities [even for nonoccupational reasons], clinical laboratory data, injuries, pulmonary function tests, audiograms, etc.). The period of time that records must be retained is specified by law depending on the type of data and the health-related agent(s) of concern. In most cases, OSHA requires that information be retained for at least 30 years after the termination of employment (OSHA Standard 29 CFR 1910.1020 Access to Employee Exposure and Medical Records). Medical records should be kept in compliance with the OSHA... 

Given the limitations above, the national and local records may be considered as useful sources for the identification of the study population. They can be used for the restriction of the study to a population in which the particular exposure is fairly common thus increasing the effectiveness of the study. However, the data on occupational exposures in these registers are often unspecific or missing. The specific exposure data during the critical period of pregnancy must be clarified from other sources. 

Several sources of address information were used, including the VA compensation and pension files, records at the St. Louis Military Personnel Records Center, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (which can obtain current address information from the Internal Revenue Service on persons with occupational exposure to possible health risks), and a commercial tracing agency. Addresses of 5,620 volunteers, or 88% of those not known to be dead, were obtained. Of these addresses, 624 (11%) were reported by the U.S. 

Mangold, C.A. 1971. Investigation of Occupational Exposure to Ammonia. Record of Industrial Hygiene Division Investigation, Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, Washington. 29 November 1971. ... 

The exposure metrics in studies of effects in children exposed as a result of then-parent s occupational exposure to pesticides are frequently based on pesticide use records or on questionnaire data, rather than on actual measurements of pesticide exposure in children (Kristensen et al, 1996 Garry et al 1996). 

Occupational exposure to Plantago species has resulted in sensitization, with symptoms ranging from rhinitis and lacrimation to more severe respiratory compromise. This problem arises in a more serious form among the personnel of pharmaceutical factories processing psyllium (SEDA-16, 426), and eosinophilia has also been recorded. The allergen appears to reside in the endosperm or embryonic seed components and not in the husk, which is the laxative component in principle, therefore, it shonld be feasible to supply a non-antigenic form of purified psylhum husk (SEDA-17, 423). 

Following an occupational exposure, it is vital that healthcare workers are cognizant of institutional policies and procedures to allow for the timely and organized collection of data and initiation of post-exposure prophylaxis if indicated. Institutions must have policies and procedures in place to react quickly to occupational exposure to avoid unnecessary delays in therapy. The date and time, details pertaining to the type of activity being performed, nature of the exposure (type, amount, severity, percutaneous, mucous membrane, time of contact, condition of skin), and details about the source (HIV infected, viral load, history of antiretroviral therapy) should be recorded in the healthcare worker s medical record. It is recommended that skin sites or wounds that are contaminated should be washed with soap and water. The use of antiseptics may be considered, but application of caustic substances such as bleach is not recommended, as this would compromise the integrity of the skin barrier. Mucous membranes should be flushed extensively with water. 

No toxicological data have been recorded for COBrF, and no Occupational Exposure Limits have been recommended. Although it is undoubtedly an irritant with a lethai capacity, it is unlikely to be as poisonous as phosgene. It is unlikely to be flammable. COBrF is not a commercially available substance, and it is not included in the European inventory of existing chemical substances (EINECS) [602a]. 

The case-control method does have its problems. Characterization of past exposure experiences by both cases and controls is sometimes based on memory. Individuals will be able to recall their occupations, but may not be able to pinpoint specific chemicals. They almost certainly can not specify the quantity of exposure (chemical concentrations), although they may perhaps recall the total time they were exposed. Study interpretation is sometimes complicated by the possibility that cases and controls may differ in their recollections of past exposures if this is the case (and it s not easy to tell if it is), the study may not meet the criteria expected for a truly controlled situation. In some cases recollection can be checked by turning to documentary records of those exposures, but past record keeping on most occupational exposures was typically irregular and incomplete. Other problems exist in selecting appropriate controls, and there are sometimes serious technical difficulties associated with statistical analysis of study results. 

Respiratory Effects. Volunteers were exposed to 98, 113, or 195 ppm 2-butoxyethanol for 4-8 hours (Carpenter et al. 1956). The recorded responses of those exposed to 195 ppm included immediate irritation of the nose and throat. The subjects exposed to 113 ppm also experienced nasal irritation and a slight increase in nasal mucus discharge. In another study, no effects on pulmonary ventilation or respiratory frequency were found in seven male volunteers exposed to 2-butoxyethanol for 2 hours at the Swedish occupational exposure limit (20 ppm) during light physical exercise on a bicycle ergometer (Johanson et al. 1986a). 

In 1879, human chemical exposures were studied during the Industrial Revolution period. It was found that chronic dermal contact with shale oil, coal distillates, petroleum products, or chimney soot could cause skin cancer. An inordinate prevalence of lung cancer was exhibited among coal miners and was the first internal cancer associated with a known occupational exposure. An iatrogenic cancer of the skin, due to long-term ingestion of potassium arsenite from Fowler s solution (used as a tonic in small doses), was recorded by 1887. In 1895, excessive cancer of the urinary bladder was identified in workers from the aniline dye industry. 

Exposed group (5,706) had potential occupational exposure to JP-8 control group (5,706) did not work in occupations in which exposure to JP-8 would occur all subjects were active duty members of US Air Force Not reported Analysis of medical records showed that subjects in all groups had similar healthcare visit rates no differences among groups in respiratory illnesses Gibson et al. 2001a"... 

OSHA develops new, and improves existing, statutory workplace health and safety standards. Setting and enforcing occupational exposure limits for hazardous substances is part of this mandate. OSHA also regulates the employee-health records kept by employers. This includes documentation of exposure to hazardous chemicals. In conjunction with NIOSH, OSHA collects and analyzes employee health statistics, providing the means to evaluate possible adverse effects of workplace exposures. 

Despite the numerous reported cases of arsenic poisoning in the medical record, it does not appear that systematic investigations of occupational exposure to arsenic were ever undertaken. The historical silence about workplace exposure to arsenic was unprecedented. None of the pioneers of occupational medicine (including Paracelsus, George Agricola, Bernardino Ramazzani, Charles Thackrah,... 

---