4.1 Article

Development of a Sampling Patch to Measure Dermal Exposures to Monomeric and Polymeric 1,6-Hexamethylene Diisocyanate: A Pilot Study

Journal

JOURNAL OF OCCUPATIONAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL HYGIENE
Volume 8, Issue 12, Pages 709-717

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/15459624.2011.626744

Keywords

1,6-hexamethylene diisocyanate (HDI); dermal exposure; dermal sampling; polyisocyanate; sampling method

Funding

  1. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health [T42 OH008673]
  2. NATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH [T42OH008673] Funding Source: NIH RePORTER

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The purpose of this study was to develop and evaluate a patch sampler to monitor dermal exposures to monomeric and polymeric 1,6-hexamethylene diisocyanate (HDI) in the automotive refinishing industry. Different patch materials were used to construct the patches, and patches impregnated with a derivatizing solution were compared with those that were not impregnated. We observed that impregnated felt patches measured significantly more HDI monomer (p = 0.04) than non-impregnated patches in a controlled experiment. Both impregnated and non-impregnated patches were compared with the tape-strip method by monitoring three spray painters' dermal exposure to monomeric and polymeric HDI. Isocyanurate was the predominant species measured by all three sampler types with detectable levels in >86% of samples. Overall, tape-strips of exposed skin measured lower levels of monomeric and polymeric HDI than impregnated patch samplers at the same sampling site on the skin. Unlike tape-strips, impregnated patches are not as prone to evaporative or reactive losses or losses due to rapid penetration into the skin. Further investigations are warranted to evaluate these and other methods to measure dermal exposure to workers under occupational conditions to better understand the relationship between dermal exposure and internal dose.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available