{"title":"Field comparison of inhalable and total dust samplers for assessing airborne dust in swine confinement barns.","authors":"Bernardo Z Predicala, Ronaldo G Maghirang","doi":"10.1080/10473220301375","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Inhalable and total dust sampling devices were compared for evaluating airborne dust in swine confinement buildings. Measurements from three swine facilities (n = 77 paired means) were obtained by area sampling using the IOM (Institute of Occupational Medicine, Edinburgh, U.K.) inhalable dust sampler and a 37-mm closed-face total (TCF) dust sampler. The overall geometric mean IOM concentration (1.18 mg/m(3), geometric standard deviation [GSD] = 2.00) was significantly greater (P < 0.05) than the overall geometric mean TCF concentration (1.08 mg/m(3), GSD = 1.98). Regression analysis with IOM and TCF values as independent and dependent variables, respectively, yielded a factor of 0.86 (+/-0.04 95% confidence interval), which can be used to estimate TCF values from the IOM measurements. Additional paired sampling data were obtained to compare the following pairs of dust samplers: (1) IOM sampler and conical inhalable sampler (CIS) (n = 20 paired means), (2) IOM and open-face total (TOF) dust samplers (n = 14), (3) CIS and TCF samplers (n = 19), and (4) TCF and TOF samplers (n = 8). Paired t-tests showed significantly (P < 0.05) higher IOM concentrations than the CIS sampler; no significant difference (P > 0.05) was found for the other three pairs compared. It may be necessary to establish work-specific conversion coefficients to obtain a reasonable estimate of worker exposure to total dust from measurements using other types of dust sampling devices.</p>","PeriodicalId":8182,"journal":{"name":"Applied occupational and environmental hygiene","volume":"18 9","pages":"694-701"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2003-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10473220301375","citationCount":"22","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied occupational and environmental hygiene","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10473220301375","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 22
Abstract
Inhalable and total dust sampling devices were compared for evaluating airborne dust in swine confinement buildings. Measurements from three swine facilities (n = 77 paired means) were obtained by area sampling using the IOM (Institute of Occupational Medicine, Edinburgh, U.K.) inhalable dust sampler and a 37-mm closed-face total (TCF) dust sampler. The overall geometric mean IOM concentration (1.18 mg/m(3), geometric standard deviation [GSD] = 2.00) was significantly greater (P < 0.05) than the overall geometric mean TCF concentration (1.08 mg/m(3), GSD = 1.98). Regression analysis with IOM and TCF values as independent and dependent variables, respectively, yielded a factor of 0.86 (+/-0.04 95% confidence interval), which can be used to estimate TCF values from the IOM measurements. Additional paired sampling data were obtained to compare the following pairs of dust samplers: (1) IOM sampler and conical inhalable sampler (CIS) (n = 20 paired means), (2) IOM and open-face total (TOF) dust samplers (n = 14), (3) CIS and TCF samplers (n = 19), and (4) TCF and TOF samplers (n = 8). Paired t-tests showed significantly (P < 0.05) higher IOM concentrations than the CIS sampler; no significant difference (P > 0.05) was found for the other three pairs compared. It may be necessary to establish work-specific conversion coefficients to obtain a reasonable estimate of worker exposure to total dust from measurements using other types of dust sampling devices.