10th International Aerosol Conference September 2 - September 7, 2018 America's Center Convention Complex St. Louis, Missouri, USA
Abstract View
Use of Cleaning Sprays: Respiratory and Musculoskeletal Human Health Effects Studied in an Exposure Chamber
KARIN LOVÉN, Jörn Nielsen, Eva Assarsson, Pia Tallving, Monica Kåredal, Aneta Wierzbicka, Camilla Dahlqvist, Catarina Nordander, Yiyi Xu, Anders Gudmundsson, Christina Isaxon, Ergonomics and Aerosol Technology, Lund University, Sweden
Abstract Number: 1247 Working Group: Health Related Aerosols
Abstract Cleaning workers belong to a large occupational group, which is exposed to many risk factors, including high physical workload and handling of cleaning products. Documented risks for professional cleaners include musculoskeletal disorders as well as the development of different respiratory symptoms (Unge et al., 2007; Lillienberg et al., 2013). Spray is a cleaning method with the advantage of easy use and even and precise dosage. A survey (n=225) conducted within this study confirmed that spray cleaning products are used by about 78 % of Swedish professional cleaning workers. There are some studies (e.g. Zock et al., 2007) linking the specific use of cleaning sprays to high occurrence of development of new-onset asthma as well as other respiratory symptoms. However, no human exposure-response study have been conducted until now in order to understand how the cleaning spray aerosols affect the user.
A human exposure-response study was conducted in a 21,6 m3 stainless steel chamber with controlled temperature, relative humidity (RH) and air exchange rate (AER). 19 volunteers; 11 female cleaning workers and 8 non-cleaning worker females, participated. The chamber was furnished as a bathroom and was cleaned using three different cleaning methods (three exposures) during three different days. The cleaning methods included A: zero exposure with only microfiber cloths, B: cleaning products applied as foam, C: cleaning products applied as spray. During the exposures, the temperature was about 22 ºC, the RH 30 % and the AER 0.9 h-1.
Particle concentrations and size distributions (in the size range 0.5-20 µm) were measured in the chamber using an Aerodynamic Particle Sizer (model 3321, TSI Inc., USA). A Condensation Particle Counter (model 3010, TSI Inc., USA) was used to measure the particle concentration in the size range 0.01-1 µm and a VelociCalc (model 9565-P, probe 986, TSI Inc., USA) was used to measure the total volatile organic compound (VOC) concentrations in the chamber.
Before and after each exposure day the volunteers went through biological sampling, including blood sample, nasal lavage and exhaled condensate. Spirometry, peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF) and tear film break up time were measured and the subjects also filled out self-assessment questionnaires. Additional measurements of the musculoskeletal load during the zero exposure (A) and the spray exposure (C) were also conducted for the 11 cleaning workers.
During spray exposure (C) a clear increase in particle concentration (0.5-20 µm) could be seen while cleaning. Concentrations during foam exposure (B) were also slightly elevated compared to the zero exposure (A). The particle concentration (0.01-1 µm) was generally low; below 500 particles/cm3, however, slight increases during exposure C and B, was observed. A slight difference between exposure C and B was also observed in the VOC measurements with higher concentrations for exposure C.
The preliminary results from the medical assessments showed a significant decrease in the PNIF measurements during spray exposure (C) compared to the zero exposure (A). The final results from the medical analysis and the musculoskeletal measurements will be available later this spring and will give a more comprehensive answer to how the different cleaning methods affect the user. With the results from this study, we can hopefully recommend the best cleaning application method to use with regards to both the respiratory as well as the musculoskeletal system.
This work was supported by Swedish AFA Insurance.
[1] Lillienberg et al. (2013) Annals of Occupational Hygiene 57(4):482-492. Unge et al. (2007) International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health 81:209-220. [2] Zock et al. (2007) American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 176:735-741.