Indoor environment in relation to recurrent childhood asthma in Yancheng, China: a hospital-based case-control study

Zhang, Baoping; Xia, Zhibin; Jiang, Xu; Yuan, Yang; Yin, Chuntao; Chen, Tianming

doi:10.1007/s11356-023-29631-1

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…al reported that symptoms such as cough, burning eyes and nasal, wheezing, throat and eye irritation, asthma, etc. had high prevalence among healthcare workers exposed to formaldehyde 19 , 38 – 40 . Zhai et.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Occupational exposure, carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic risk assessment of formaldehyde in the pathology labs of hospitals in Iran

Foroughi,

Golbabaei,

Sadeghi-Yarandi

et al. 2024

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Formaldehyde, a known carcinogenic compound, is commonly used in various medical settings. The objective of this study was to assess the carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic risks associated with occupational exposure to formaldehyde. This study was conducted in the pathology labs of four hospitals in Tehran. Cancer and non-cancer risks were evaluated using the quantitative risk assessment method proposed by the United States environmental protection agency (USEPA), along with its provided database known as the integrated risk information system (IRIS). Respiratory symptoms were assessed using the American thoracic society (ATS) questionnaire. The results indicated that 91.23% of exposure levels in occupational groups exceed the NIOSH standard of 0.016 ppm. Regarding carcinogenic risk, 41.03% of all the studied subjects were in the definite carcinogenic risk range (LCR > 10−4), 23.08% were in the possible carcinogenic risk range (10−5 < LCR < 10−4), and 35.90% were in the negligible risk range (LCR < 10−6). The highest index of occupational carcinogenesis was observed in the group of lab technicians with a risk number of 3.7 × 10−4, followed by pathologists with a risk number of 1.7 × 10−4. Furthermore, 23.08% of the studied subjects were within the permitted health risk range (HQ < 1.0), while 76.92% were within the unhealthy risk range (HQ > 1.0). Overall, the findings revealed significantly higher carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic risks among lab technicians and pathologists. Therefore, it is imperative to implement control measures across various hospital departments to mitigate occupational formaldehyde exposure levels proactively. These findings can be valuable for policymakers in the health sector, aiding in the elimination or reduction of airborne formaldehyde exposure in work environments.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%