Occupational Exposure Assessment of Highway Toll Station Workers to Vehicle Engine Exhaust

Abstract

Toll station workers are occupationally exposed to vehicle engine exhaust, a complex mixture of different chemical substances, including carcinogenic compounds. Therefore, a study was carried out on attendants of two highway toll stations to describe their occupational exposure to vehicle engine exhaust, based on a worst-case scenario approach. Personal sampling was conducted during the day shift for all attendants, testing for three groups of chemical substances: polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and aldehydes (formaldehyde and acrolein). Concentrations of total PAH, BTEX (benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, and xylenes) and formaldehyde content varied between 97.60-336.08 ng/m3, 5.01-40.52 μg/m3, and 0.06-19.13 μg/m3, respectively. No clear relationships could be established between exposure levels and the number of vehicles. Furthermore, no differences were found between truck versus car lanes, or inside versus outside the tollbooth. Not all the detected VOCs were related to vehicle exhaust; some were consistent with the use of cleaning products. The measured concentrations were far below the established occupational exposure limits, but tended to be higher than values reported for outdoor urban environments. There are very few international studies assessing occupational exposures among toll station workers, and this is the first such study to be conducted in Spain. The results suggest that further, more detailed studies are necessary to characterize exposure properly, and ones which include other airborne pollutants, such as ultrafine particles. The comparison of the results to other similar studies was difficult, since no data related to some important exposure determinants have been provided. Therefore, it is recommended that these determinants be considered in future studies.

Impact of occupational exposure on job satisfaction and overall happiness among Chinese physicians and nurses: A cross‐sectional study

“…The major pathogenic microbes that could be transmitted through occupational exposure include human immunodeficiency virus, hepatitis B virus, hepatitis C virus and treponema pallidum (Wang et al, 2020). In addition, several viral epidemics have occurred in the past 20 years, such as severe acute respiratory syndrome, H1N1 influenza, Middle East respiratory syndrome, Ebola virus disease and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19), which have seriously threatened the health and safety of health care workers (Belloc‐Santaliestra et al, 2015; Descatha & Roquelaure, 2018; Wang et al, 2015). A study indicated that more than 890 health care workers were infected, with a mortality rate of 57%, during the Ebola virus outbreak in sub‐Saharan Africa (Ngatu et al, 2017).…”

“…Occupational exposure has aroused widespread concern in various professions and has become one of the most serious public health issues worldwide (Belloc-Santaliestra et al, 2015;Descatha & Roquelaure, 2018;Wang et al, 2015). Health care workers provide patient care in environments that are considered to be one of the most unsafe occupational settings (Mossburg et al, 2019).…”

Occupational scenarios and exposure assessment to formaldehyde: A systematic review

“…As regard to the industrial scenarios, [75][76][77][78][79][80][81][82][83][84] airborne formaldehyde is generally present at low levels (micrograms), except where it is directly released from resins 76 or used for its biocidal properties in dairy facilities 76,81 and fish hatcheries. 83 In addition to the well-known exposure profile of firefighters, [85][86][87] other investigated scenarios are very diversified, both in terms of settings (school campuses, laundries, copy centers etc) [88][89][90][91][92][93][94] and in terms of formaldehyde levels (from not detectable to some mg m −3 ).…”

“…In addition to the well‐known exposure profile of firefighters, 85 , 86 , 87 other investigated scenarios are very diversified, both in terms of settings (school campuses, laundries, copy centers etc) 88 , 89 , 90 , 91 , 92 , 93 , 94 and in terms of formaldehyde levels (from not detectable to some mg m −3 ).…”

“…As shown in Table 5, three studies [85][86][87] Other monitored occupational activities and/or scenarios included gardening activities, 88 vehicles such as taxi, bus and subway, 89 highway tollbooth, 90 gas station, 91 school campus as a micro-scale society, 92 dry cleaning shops, 93 copy centers. 94 In most cases, exposure to formaldehyde was evaluated with active and/or passive environmental and active and/or passive personal sampling with 2,4-DNPH cartridges and HPLC with UV/VIS or UV/DAD detector.…”