Exposure, skin protection and occupational skin diseases in the glass‐fibre‐reinforced plastics industry

Abstract

A total of 100 workers, 86 from the glass-fibre-reinforced plastics (GRP) industry, 11 from polystyrene production and 3 from polyester resin coating manufacture, were examined for occupational skin hazards and for evaluation of skin protection. The workers had been exposed to many chemicals. Those working in the GRP industry had also been exposed to glass fibre and to dust produced by finishing work. 94% used protective gloves. 22 workers, all employed in the GRP industry, had contracted occupational skin disorders. 6 had allergic and 12 irritant contact dermatitis. 4 workers had an accidental injury caused by a peroxide catalyst, fire, hot air and constant mechanical friction. Allergic dermatoses were due to natural rubber (latex) (4 cases) in protective gloves, phenol-formaldehyde resin (1 case) and cobalt naphthenate (1 case). Irritant hand dermatoses (5 cases) were caused by the combined hazardous effect of unsaturated polyester or vinyl ester resins, organic solvents, glass fibre and dust from finishing work on the skin. Other cases of irritant dermatoses (7 cases) were due to the dust, promoted by mechanical friction of clothes. Skin disorders in the GRP industry were common (26%) but the symptoms were mild and only 3 patients had been on sick leave because of occupational skin disease.

Skin Problems among Fiber-Glass Reinforced Plastics Factory Workers in Japan.

“…Of the Japanese FRP workers in this study, 58.8% reported having a history of skin problems which is in agreement with a Finnish study 3) where 62% of the Finish workers of FRP factories reported skin problems since initial employment in FRP manufacture.…”

“…Skin problems of FRP workers may arise from a number of causative agents including resin, styrene, auxiliary agents, hardeners [2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11] , glass fiber [12][13][14] and dust comprising of shortened glass fiber and plastic particles 17) . Glass fiber with a diameter greater than 4 µm can cause irritation and dermatitis 14) and all factories surveyed were using glass fiber with greater diameters (11 or 23 µm) and so workers were at risk of developing dermatitis.…”

Health hazard evaluation report: HETA #2001-0326-2999, Dixie Cultured Marble, Birmingham, Alabama.

“…13 One study found that skin disorders in a group of workers similar to those at DCM were common but the symptoms were mild and did not cause many lost work days. 14 The findings of this HHE are consistent with this observation. The fiberglass found on the skin of workers in this study was 10 µm in diameter.…”

Axial Compressive Behavior of Rope Fi Reinforced Polymer Composite Concrete

“…The previous studies have shown that FRPs strengthening is very effective to alter the performance of concrete members. Several studies reported skin problems such as irritant and allergic contact dermatitis for workers during synthetic FRP manufacturing and application procedure [13,14]. One possible solution to the aforementioned problems would be the replacement of synthetic fibers with natural fibers.…”