Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (7)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by JONES, K.
Right arrow Articles by FRASER, I.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by JONES, K.
Right arrow Articles by FRASER, I.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Ann. occup. Hyg., Vol. 47, No. 2, pp. 145-150, 2003
© 2003 British Occupational Hygiene Society
Published by Oxford University Press

Factors Affecting the Extent of Dermal Absorption of Solvent Vapours: A Human Volunteer Study

K. JONES1,*, J. COCKER1, L. J. DODD1 and I. FRASER2

1 Health & Safety Laboratory, Broad Lane, Sheffield S3 7HQ; 2 Health & Safety Executive, Bootle, Liverpool L20 3QZ, UK

Received 15 August 2002; in final form 6 November 2002

Objectives: We have previously reported that solvent vapours can be absorbed through the skin and that the extent varies markedly and depends on the chemical. For some chemicals, the extent of absorption is significant, e.g. for 1-methoxy-2-propanol dermal absorption accounts for up to 14% of the total absorbed dose after 8 h exposure at the OES. We have conducted a second study using 2-butoxyethanol to investigate the influence of temperature, humidity and clothing on the dermal absorption of vapours. As for the first study, the extent of dermal absorption was determined by biological monitoring to measure the resultant body burden of the chemical.

Methods: Four volunteers were exposed on nine occasions. For eight of these exposures they wore air-fed half-masks to supply clean air for the inhalation route. The ‘baseline’ conditions (one ‘whole body’ and one ‘skin only’ exposure) were 25°C, 40% relative humidity with volunteers wearing shorts and T-shirt. For each subsequent exposure, a single parameter was changed: humidity (60%, 65%), temperature (20°C, 30°C) or clothing (minimal and overalls). Finally, a ‘industrial scenario’ was conducted where volunteers wore overalls over their shorts and T-shirts and environmental conditions reflected high temperature and high humidity (30°C, 60%), such as might be encountered in a tank-cleaning operation or similar.

Results: Results show that ‘baseline’ dermal absorption of 2-butoxyethanol vapour was, on average, 11% of the total absorbed dose. Higher temperature (30°C, mean 14%, P = 0.03) and greater humidity (65% RH, mean 13%, P = 0.1) increased dermal absorption. The wearing of whole-body overalls did not attenuate absorption (mean 10%). By combining several factors together in the ‘industrial scenario’, dermal absorption of vapours was significantly increased with a mean of 39% of the total absorbed dose.

Conclusions: The work has shown that dermal absorption of vapours can be significant and that environmental conditions may affect the absorption. Some types of protective clothing may not be suitable to reduce absorption. The possibility of dermal absorption of vapours should be considered particularly for workers in high vapour concentration conditions where control of exposure relies on respiratory protection.

Keywords: 2-butoxyethanol; solvent vapours; dermal absorption; temperature; humidity; clothing


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
ANN OCCUP HYGHome page
F. E. LINDSAY, S. SEMPLE, A. ROBERTSON, and J. W. CHERRIE
Development of a Biologically Relevant Dermal Sampler
Ann. Hyg., January 1, 2006; 50(1): 85 - 94.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.