4.3 Review

Recent Advances in Occupational Exposure Assessment of Aerosols

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17186820

Keywords

exposure assessment; aerosols; air sampling

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Exposure science is underpinned by characterization (measurement) of exposures. In this article, six recent advances in exposure characterization by sampling and analysis are reviewed as tools in the occupational exposure assessment of aerosols. Three advances discussed in detail are (1) recognition and inclusion of sampler wall deposits; (2) development of a new sampling and analytical procedure for respirable crystalline silica that allows non-destructive field analysis at the end of the sampling period; and (3) development of a new sampler to collect the portion of sub-300 nm aerodynamic diameter particles that would deposit in human airways. Three additional developments are described briefly: (4) a size-selective aerosol sampler that allows the collection of multiple physiologically-relevant size fractions; (5) a miniaturized pump and versatile sampling head to meet multiple size-selective sampling criteria; and (6) a novel method of sampling bioaerosols including viruses while maintaining viability. These recent developments are placed in the context of the historical evolution in sampling and analytical developments from 1900 to the present day. While these are not the only advances in exposure characterization, or exposure assessment techniques, they provide an illustration of how technological advances are adding more tools to our toolkit. The review concludes with a number of recommended areas for future research, including expansion of real-time and end-of-shift on-site measurement, development of samplers that operate at higher flow-rates to ensure measurement at lowered limit values, and development of procedures that accurately distinguish aerosol and vapor phases of semi-volatile substances.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available