澳大利亚毒理学和毒物网络(TAPNA) 2021科学会议论文集

G. Adamo, T. Jiranantakan, R. Auld, D. Roberts, C. McDonald, C. Harper, J. Brown
{"title":"澳大利亚毒理学和毒物网络(TAPNA) 2021科学会议论文集","authors":"G. Adamo, T. Jiranantakan, R. Auld, D. Roberts, C. McDonald, C. Harper, J. Brown","doi":"10.1080/24734306.2021.1940753","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Covid-19 resulted in a sharp increase in the use of, demand and supply for alcohol-based hand sanitisers. A dramatic increase in calls to the NSW Poisons Information Centre (PIC) regarding hand sanitiser exposures prompted this investigation into increased risks of hand sanitisers. Methods: This prospective observational study aims to evaluate hand sanitiser products resulting in calls to the NSW PIC from April to July 2020. Photos and extra information of products including brand, alcohol type and percent, bottle size, formulation, country of manufacture, amount ingested and symptoms were obtained during normal NSWPIC operation. Follow-up phone calls were made following caller’s permission to determine outcome of exposures. Two specialists in poisons information critically reviewed all images for compliance. First step determined whether the products classify as therapeutic goods or cosmetic goods in accordance with therapeutic good regulations. Second determined appropriateness of labelling and packaging respectively against its category. Results: 309 images were received from callers for 124 separate hand sanitisers. Review of images revealed 105 products (84.7%) classified as cosmetic goods, 17 made claims that classify them as therapeutic goods, of which 14 did not comply with regulations. NSWPIC reported these 14 products to the TGA and prompted relevant regulatory bodies and industry representatives. Only 3 of 124 products had ARTG number on the packaging. 18 products had packaging similar to drink/ beverage containers or cosmetics. Community members reported concerns of inappropriate packaging for another 15 products. There was a 2.2-times increase in calls to NSWPIC regarding hand-sanitisers from January to July 2020 (1095 cases) when compared to the same period in 2019 (504 cases). Most patients were children under 5 years old and had minor illness. No death was observed in our patients. Discussion: A significant number of hand sanitiser products in this study were misclassified by the manufactures and had inappropriate containers and labelling. Safety measures must be critically taken in timely manner to achieve safe hand sanitiser use. Poisons Information Centre has played an important role enacting prompt data collections and public health interventions leading to modification of the regulations and recommendations.","PeriodicalId":23139,"journal":{"name":"Toxicology communications","volume":"2013 1","pages":"119 - 135"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Proceedings of the Toxicology and Poisons Network Australasia (TAPNA) 2021 Scientific Meeting\",\"authors\":\"G. Adamo, T. Jiranantakan, R. Auld, D. Roberts, C. McDonald, C. Harper, J. Brown\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/24734306.2021.1940753\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background: Covid-19 resulted in a sharp increase in the use of, demand and supply for alcohol-based hand sanitisers. A dramatic increase in calls to the NSW Poisons Information Centre (PIC) regarding hand sanitiser exposures prompted this investigation into increased risks of hand sanitisers. Methods: This prospective observational study aims to evaluate hand sanitiser products resulting in calls to the NSW PIC from April to July 2020. Photos and extra information of products including brand, alcohol type and percent, bottle size, formulation, country of manufacture, amount ingested and symptoms were obtained during normal NSWPIC operation. Follow-up phone calls were made following caller’s permission to determine outcome of exposures. Two specialists in poisons information critically reviewed all images for compliance. First step determined whether the products classify as therapeutic goods or cosmetic goods in accordance with therapeutic good regulations. Second determined appropriateness of labelling and packaging respectively against its category. Results: 309 images were received from callers for 124 separate hand sanitisers. Review of images revealed 105 products (84.7%) classified as cosmetic goods, 17 made claims that classify them as therapeutic goods, of which 14 did not comply with regulations. NSWPIC reported these 14 products to the TGA and prompted relevant regulatory bodies and industry representatives. Only 3 of 124 products had ARTG number on the packaging. 18 products had packaging similar to drink/ beverage containers or cosmetics. Community members reported concerns of inappropriate packaging for another 15 products. There was a 2.2-times increase in calls to NSWPIC regarding hand-sanitisers from January to July 2020 (1095 cases) when compared to the same period in 2019 (504 cases). Most patients were children under 5 years old and had minor illness. No death was observed in our patients. Discussion: A significant number of hand sanitiser products in this study were misclassified by the manufactures and had inappropriate containers and labelling. Safety measures must be critically taken in timely manner to achieve safe hand sanitiser use. Poisons Information Centre has played an important role enacting prompt data collections and public health interventions leading to modification of the regulations and recommendations.\",\"PeriodicalId\":23139,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Toxicology communications\",\"volume\":\"2013 1\",\"pages\":\"119 - 135\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Toxicology communications\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/24734306.2021.1940753\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Toxicology communications","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/24734306.2021.1940753","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:2019冠状病毒病导致含酒精洗手液的使用、需求和供应急剧增加。新南威尔士州毒物信息中心(PIC)关于洗手液暴露的电话急剧增加,促使这项调查增加了洗手液的风险。方法:本前瞻性观察研究旨在评估2020年4月至7月期间NSW PIC来电的洗手液产品。在正常的NSWPIC操作过程中获得产品的照片和额外信息,包括品牌,酒精类型和百分比,瓶子大小,配方,制造国家,摄入量和症状。在得到呼叫者的允许后,进行了后续电话调查,以确定暴露的结果。两名毒物信息专家严格审查了所有图像的合规性。第一步确定产品是否按照治疗品法规归类为治疗品或化妆品。第二确定适当的标签和包装分别针对其类别。结果:从124种不同的洗手液的呼叫者那里收到309张图片。对图片的审查显示,105种产品(84.7%)被归类为化妆品,17种产品声称将其归类为治疗产品,其中14种产品不符合法规。NSWPIC向TGA报告了这14种产品,并促使相关监管机构和行业代表。124个产品中只有3个在包装上有ARTG编号。18种产品的包装类似于饮料/饮料容器或化妆品。社区成员报告了另外15种产品的不当包装问题。与2019年同期(504例)相比,2020年1月至7月,NSWPIC关于洗手液的电话增加了2.2倍(1095例)。大多数患者为5岁以下的儿童,病情轻微。我们的患者中没有观察到死亡。讨论:本研究中大量的洗手液产品被制造商错误分类,并且容器和标签不合适。必须及时采取严格的安全措施,以实现安全使用洗手液。毒物信息中心在及时收集数据和采取公共卫生干预措施,从而修改条例和建议方面发挥了重要作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Proceedings of the Toxicology and Poisons Network Australasia (TAPNA) 2021 Scientific Meeting
Background: Covid-19 resulted in a sharp increase in the use of, demand and supply for alcohol-based hand sanitisers. A dramatic increase in calls to the NSW Poisons Information Centre (PIC) regarding hand sanitiser exposures prompted this investigation into increased risks of hand sanitisers. Methods: This prospective observational study aims to evaluate hand sanitiser products resulting in calls to the NSW PIC from April to July 2020. Photos and extra information of products including brand, alcohol type and percent, bottle size, formulation, country of manufacture, amount ingested and symptoms were obtained during normal NSWPIC operation. Follow-up phone calls were made following caller’s permission to determine outcome of exposures. Two specialists in poisons information critically reviewed all images for compliance. First step determined whether the products classify as therapeutic goods or cosmetic goods in accordance with therapeutic good regulations. Second determined appropriateness of labelling and packaging respectively against its category. Results: 309 images were received from callers for 124 separate hand sanitisers. Review of images revealed 105 products (84.7%) classified as cosmetic goods, 17 made claims that classify them as therapeutic goods, of which 14 did not comply with regulations. NSWPIC reported these 14 products to the TGA and prompted relevant regulatory bodies and industry representatives. Only 3 of 124 products had ARTG number on the packaging. 18 products had packaging similar to drink/ beverage containers or cosmetics. Community members reported concerns of inappropriate packaging for another 15 products. There was a 2.2-times increase in calls to NSWPIC regarding hand-sanitisers from January to July 2020 (1095 cases) when compared to the same period in 2019 (504 cases). Most patients were children under 5 years old and had minor illness. No death was observed in our patients. Discussion: A significant number of hand sanitiser products in this study were misclassified by the manufactures and had inappropriate containers and labelling. Safety measures must be critically taken in timely manner to achieve safe hand sanitiser use. Poisons Information Centre has played an important role enacting prompt data collections and public health interventions leading to modification of the regulations and recommendations.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Thermal injury after “huffing” compressed air duster: a case report Cyanide poisoning and organ donation in Australia: a case report Accuracy of plant identification applications to identify plants in suspected poisoning cases referred to the Queensland Poisons Information Centre Abstracts of the Toxicology and Poisons Network Australasia (TAPNA) 2024 Annual Scientific Meeting (Melbourne, Victoria). Death from bongkrekic acid toxicity: first report in North America
×
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