Work Practices and Respirable Crystalline Silica Exposures in Stone Countertop Fabrication Shops.

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Caitlin M McGowan, Linda F Cantley, Robert Klein, Carrie A Redlich
{"title":"Work Practices and Respirable Crystalline Silica Exposures in Stone Countertop Fabrication Shops.","authors":"Caitlin M McGowan, Linda F Cantley, Robert Klein, Carrie A Redlich","doi":"10.1002/ajim.70020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Reports of silicosis among US workers who fabricate and install stone countertops are increasing. Our aim was to better characterize work processes, stone type, occupational health practices, and exposures to respirable crystalline silica (RCS) in this industry.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A survey was administered to stone countertop fabrication shops to assess shop characteristics, controls, and operations. Shops were asked to share past RCS air monitoring reports. We examined associations between RCS concentrations and stone type, similar exposure groups (SEG), and engineering controls in multivariate models, and RCS exposures by shop.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 257 shops surveyed, 98% reported processing both natural and engineered stone (ES), utilizing semi-automated equipment and small hand tools, and a variety of control methods. Only 42% of shops that required the use of a respirator reported conducting respirator fit testing, and only 19.5% performed medical surveillance. A total of 47% of shops reported RCS air sampling, with 38% submitting 292 RCS air samples used for this analysis. Overall, the RCS geometric mean (GM) was 14.1 μg/m<sup>3</sup>, with 75.7% of RCS samples below the US Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) action limit (AL). However, RCS levels were highly variable (range 2.8-5100.0 μg/m<sup>3</sup>), with 9.2% of RCS samples exceeding the OSHA permissible exposure limit (PEL), and 43.5% shops 1 or more samples above the OSHA AL. Use of small hand tools with no controls produced the highest RCS exposures, and dry work had significantly higher RCS exposures than any control method.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The findings underscore the extensive use of ES and the opportunity for overexposure to RCS in this industry. They highlight the need to eliminate dry processing methods, enhance respiratory protection, and perform repeated RCS sampling to monitor the effectiveness of controls. Additionally, more widespread medical surveillance is urgently needed to assess the extent of silicosis in this industry.</p>","PeriodicalId":7873,"journal":{"name":"American journal of industrial medicine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of industrial medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ajim.70020","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Reports of silicosis among US workers who fabricate and install stone countertops are increasing. Our aim was to better characterize work processes, stone type, occupational health practices, and exposures to respirable crystalline silica (RCS) in this industry.

Methods: A survey was administered to stone countertop fabrication shops to assess shop characteristics, controls, and operations. Shops were asked to share past RCS air monitoring reports. We examined associations between RCS concentrations and stone type, similar exposure groups (SEG), and engineering controls in multivariate models, and RCS exposures by shop.

Results: Of 257 shops surveyed, 98% reported processing both natural and engineered stone (ES), utilizing semi-automated equipment and small hand tools, and a variety of control methods. Only 42% of shops that required the use of a respirator reported conducting respirator fit testing, and only 19.5% performed medical surveillance. A total of 47% of shops reported RCS air sampling, with 38% submitting 292 RCS air samples used for this analysis. Overall, the RCS geometric mean (GM) was 14.1 μg/m3, with 75.7% of RCS samples below the US Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) action limit (AL). However, RCS levels were highly variable (range 2.8-5100.0 μg/m3), with 9.2% of RCS samples exceeding the OSHA permissible exposure limit (PEL), and 43.5% shops 1 or more samples above the OSHA AL. Use of small hand tools with no controls produced the highest RCS exposures, and dry work had significantly higher RCS exposures than any control method.

Conclusions: The findings underscore the extensive use of ES and the opportunity for overexposure to RCS in this industry. They highlight the need to eliminate dry processing methods, enhance respiratory protection, and perform repeated RCS sampling to monitor the effectiveness of controls. Additionally, more widespread medical surveillance is urgently needed to assess the extent of silicosis in this industry.

石材台面加工车间的工作实践和可呼吸结晶二氧化硅暴露。
背景:在美国制造和安装石材台面的工人中,矽肺病的报告正在增加。我们的目的是更好地描述该行业的工作流程、石材类型、职业健康实践和可吸入结晶二氧化硅(RCS)暴露。方法:对石材台面加工车间进行调查,评估车间特点、控制和操作。商店被要求提供过去的RCS空气监测报告。我们在多变量模型中研究了RCS浓度与石材类型、相似暴露组(SEG)和工程控制之间的关系,以及RCS暴露与商店之间的关系。结果:在调查的257家商店中,98%的商店报告加工天然石材和工程石材(ES),使用半自动设备和小型手工工具,以及各种控制方法。在要求使用呼吸器的商店中,只有42%的商店报告进行了呼吸器适合性测试,只有19.5%的商店进行了医疗监测。总共47%的商店报告了RCS空气采样,38%的商店提交了292个用于分析的RCS空气样本。总体而言,RCS几何平均值(GM)为14.1 μg/m3, 75.7%的RCS样本低于美国职业安全与健康管理局(OSHA)的作用限值(AL)。然而,RCS水平变化很大(范围为2.8-5100.0 μg/m3), 9.2%的RCS样品超过OSHA允许暴露限值(PEL), 43.5%的样品超过OSHA AL的1个或更多样品。使用没有控制的小型手工工具产生最高的RCS暴露量,干性工作的RCS暴露量明显高于任何控制方法。结论:研究结果强调了ES的广泛使用以及该行业过度暴露于RCS的机会。他们强调需要消除干处理方法,加强呼吸保护,并进行重复RCS采样以监测控制的有效性。此外,迫切需要更广泛的医疗监测来评估该行业矽肺病的程度。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
American journal of industrial medicine
American journal of industrial medicine 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
5.70%
发文量
108
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: American Journal of Industrial Medicine considers for publication reports of original research, review articles, instructive case reports, and analyses of policy in the fields of occupational and environmental health and safety. The Journal also accepts commentaries, book reviews and letters of comment and criticism. The goals of the journal are to advance and disseminate knowledge, promote research and foster the prevention of disease and injury. Specific topics of interest include: occupational disease; environmental disease; pesticides; cancer; occupational epidemiology; environmental epidemiology; disease surveillance systems; ergonomics; dust diseases; lead poisoning; neurotoxicology; endocrine disruptors.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信