Acute sensory irritation from exposure to isopropanol (2-propanol) at TLV in workers and controls: objective versus subjective effects.

M. Smeets, C. Mauté, P. Dalton
{"title":"Acute sensory irritation from exposure to isopropanol (2-propanol) at TLV in workers and controls: objective versus subjective effects.","authors":"M. Smeets, C. Mauté, P. Dalton","doi":"10.1093/ANNHYG/MEF054","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"OBJECTIVES\nPhlebotomists occupationally exposed to isopropanol (IPA) (2-propanol) and naïve controls (n = 12 per group) were exposed to the time-weighted average threshold limit value of 400 p.p.m. IPA for 4 h in an environmental chamber to investigate: (i) acute effects of sensory irritation using subjective health symptom reports and objective, physiological end-points; and (ii) differences in measured effects in relation to exposure history.\n\n\nMETHODS\nBefore, during and after exposure subjects gave self-reports of health complaints. During exposure subjects rated the intensity of the odor, sensory irritation and annoyance. Objective end-points of ocular hyperemia, nasal congestion, nasal secretion and respiration were obtained at various times before, during and after exposure. Results were compared with exposure to phenylethyl alcohol (PEA), a negative control for irritation, and to clean air (CA), a negative control for odor and irritation, using a within-subjects design.\n\n\nRESULTS\nSignificantly higher intensity ratings of odor, irritation and annoyance were reported during the exposure to IPA, when compared with exposure to CA or PEA. Nevertheless, the overall level of reported sensory irritation to IPA was low and perceived as 'weak' on average. Health symptom ratings were not significantly elevated for IPA as compared with PEA or CA exposure. The only physiological end-point that showed a change exclusively in the IPA condition was respiration frequency: relative to baseline, respiration frequency increased in response to IPA in both groups. No differences were encountered between the occupationally exposed and the control groups.\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nThe increase in respiration frequency in response to IPA may reflect either a reflexive change due to sensory irritation (an autonomic event) or a voluntary change in breathing in response to perception of an unpleasant, solvent-like odor (a physiological event caused by cognitive mediation). Our findings on objective end-points, including nasal and ocular sensory irritation, did not confirm subjective irritation reports. Irritation reports and odor intensity decreased, rather than increased, over time, lending credence to the cognitive argument and suggesting that the elevated subjective responses to IPA may be mediated by responses to its odor.","PeriodicalId":342592,"journal":{"name":"The Annals of occupational hygiene","volume":"93 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"36","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Annals of occupational hygiene","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ANNHYG/MEF054","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 36

Abstract

OBJECTIVES Phlebotomists occupationally exposed to isopropanol (IPA) (2-propanol) and naïve controls (n = 12 per group) were exposed to the time-weighted average threshold limit value of 400 p.p.m. IPA for 4 h in an environmental chamber to investigate: (i) acute effects of sensory irritation using subjective health symptom reports and objective, physiological end-points; and (ii) differences in measured effects in relation to exposure history. METHODS Before, during and after exposure subjects gave self-reports of health complaints. During exposure subjects rated the intensity of the odor, sensory irritation and annoyance. Objective end-points of ocular hyperemia, nasal congestion, nasal secretion and respiration were obtained at various times before, during and after exposure. Results were compared with exposure to phenylethyl alcohol (PEA), a negative control for irritation, and to clean air (CA), a negative control for odor and irritation, using a within-subjects design. RESULTS Significantly higher intensity ratings of odor, irritation and annoyance were reported during the exposure to IPA, when compared with exposure to CA or PEA. Nevertheless, the overall level of reported sensory irritation to IPA was low and perceived as 'weak' on average. Health symptom ratings were not significantly elevated for IPA as compared with PEA or CA exposure. The only physiological end-point that showed a change exclusively in the IPA condition was respiration frequency: relative to baseline, respiration frequency increased in response to IPA in both groups. No differences were encountered between the occupationally exposed and the control groups. CONCLUSIONS The increase in respiration frequency in response to IPA may reflect either a reflexive change due to sensory irritation (an autonomic event) or a voluntary change in breathing in response to perception of an unpleasant, solvent-like odor (a physiological event caused by cognitive mediation). Our findings on objective end-points, including nasal and ocular sensory irritation, did not confirm subjective irritation reports. Irritation reports and odor intensity decreased, rather than increased, over time, lending credence to the cognitive argument and suggesting that the elevated subjective responses to IPA may be mediated by responses to its odor.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
工人和对照组在TLV暴露于异丙醇(2-丙醇)引起的急性感觉刺激:客观与主观影响
目的:将职业暴露于异丙醇(IPA)(2-丙醇)和naïve对照组(每组n = 12)在环境室中暴露于400ppm IPA的时间加权平均阈限值4小时,以调查:(i)使用主观健康症状报告和客观生理终点的感觉刺激的急性效应;(ii)与暴露史相关的测量效应差异。方法受试者在暴露前、暴露中、暴露后分别自我报告健康状况。在暴露期间,受试者对气味、感官刺激和烦恼的强度进行评级。观察暴露前后不同时间眼充血、鼻塞、鼻分泌物和呼吸的终点。使用受试者内设计,将结果与暴露于苯乙醇(PEA)(刺激阴性对照)和清洁空气(CA)(气味和刺激阴性对照)进行比较。结果与暴露于CA或PEA相比,暴露于IPA期间报告的气味,刺激和烦恼的强度等级显着更高。然而,报告的对IPA的感官刺激的总体水平很低,平均感觉为“弱”。与PEA或CA暴露相比,IPA暴露的健康症状评分没有显著升高。在IPA条件下唯一显示变化的生理终点是呼吸频率:相对于基线,两组的呼吸频率均因IPA而增加。在职业暴露组和对照组之间没有发现差异。结论:IPA引起的呼吸频率增加可能反映了由于感觉刺激引起的反射性变化(一种自主事件),也可能反映了由于感知到令人不快的溶剂样气味而引起的自主呼吸变化(一种由认知介导引起的生理事件)。我们对客观终点的研究结果,包括鼻和眼感觉刺激,并没有证实主观刺激报告。随着时间的推移,刺激报告和气味强度减少而不是增加,这为认知论证提供了证据,并表明对IPA的主观反应升高可能是由对其气味的反应介导的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Response to Article by Prof. Hans Kromhout, Hygiene Without Numbers. The Validity and Applicability of Using a Generic Exposure Assessment Model for Occupational Exposure to Nano-Objects and Their Aggregates and Agglomerates. Occupational Exposure to Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in Polish Coke Plant Workers. A New Miniature Respirable Sampler for In-mask Sampling: Part 2-Tests Performed Inside the Mask. When Are Risk Analyses on Job Titles Informative?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1