解剖病理实验室甲醛影响评估战略--第三部分

Q4 Social Sciences
Sigurnost Pub Date : 2024-07-08 DOI:10.31306/s.66.2.1
Stefano Dugheri, G. Cappelli, Nicola Mucci, G. Arcangeli, Lucia Isolani, L. Trevisani, Donato Squillaci, Elisabetta Bucaletti, Jacopo Ceccarelli, Simone Pettinari, Giovanni Amagliani, Niccolò Fanfani
{"title":"解剖病理实验室甲醛影响评估战略--第三部分","authors":"Stefano Dugheri, G. Cappelli, Nicola Mucci, G. Arcangeli, Lucia Isolani, L. Trevisani, Donato Squillaci, Elisabetta Bucaletti, Jacopo Ceccarelli, Simone Pettinari, Giovanni Amagliani, Niccolò Fanfani","doi":"10.31306/s.66.2.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"To date, formaldehyde (FA) is one of the more common chemicals and its use is widespread around the world in different sectors, especially in chemical facilities and health care. FA is widely used in working activities owing to its chemical and physical properties. However, it also represents a concerning hazard for the workers’ health due to its toxicity and recognized carcinogenicity. The FA exposure evaluation in occupational setting has arisen interest in the scientific community that leads to the development of several analytical instruments in order to assess both long term and short-term exposure. The paper presents and discusses an equivalence tests procedure via the 2.4-dinitrophenylhydrazine (DNPH)-active air sampling formaldehyde (FA) reference method and two non-reference instruments based on continuous, direct reading monitoring, namely ProCeas® (AP2E) and NEMo XT (Ethera). The FA standard atmosphere calibration system was used to check the reference method by Pearson’s test. Subsequently, the Passing-Bablok test was carried out between the non-reference methods and the DNPH method for potential systematic or proportional errors, and finally the Bland-Altman plot was applied to determine the mean bias and the variances of the recorded values by the reference and non-reference methods in on-field sampling. The results showed a good correlation between the non-references method and the DNPH ones, suggesting their possible applications in heterogeneous occupational scenarios.","PeriodicalId":53654,"journal":{"name":"Sigurnost","volume":"115 39","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Strategija za ocjenjivanje učinka formaldehida u anatomskom patološkom laboratoriju treći dio\",\"authors\":\"Stefano Dugheri, G. Cappelli, Nicola Mucci, G. Arcangeli, Lucia Isolani, L. Trevisani, Donato Squillaci, Elisabetta Bucaletti, Jacopo Ceccarelli, Simone Pettinari, Giovanni Amagliani, Niccolò Fanfani\",\"doi\":\"10.31306/s.66.2.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"To date, formaldehyde (FA) is one of the more common chemicals and its use is widespread around the world in different sectors, especially in chemical facilities and health care. FA is widely used in working activities owing to its chemical and physical properties. However, it also represents a concerning hazard for the workers’ health due to its toxicity and recognized carcinogenicity. The FA exposure evaluation in occupational setting has arisen interest in the scientific community that leads to the development of several analytical instruments in order to assess both long term and short-term exposure. The paper presents and discusses an equivalence tests procedure via the 2.4-dinitrophenylhydrazine (DNPH)-active air sampling formaldehyde (FA) reference method and two non-reference instruments based on continuous, direct reading monitoring, namely ProCeas® (AP2E) and NEMo XT (Ethera). The FA standard atmosphere calibration system was used to check the reference method by Pearson’s test. Subsequently, the Passing-Bablok test was carried out between the non-reference methods and the DNPH method for potential systematic or proportional errors, and finally the Bland-Altman plot was applied to determine the mean bias and the variances of the recorded values by the reference and non-reference methods in on-field sampling. The results showed a good correlation between the non-references method and the DNPH ones, suggesting their possible applications in heterogeneous occupational scenarios.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53654,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sigurnost\",\"volume\":\"115 39\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sigurnost\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31306/s.66.2.1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sigurnost","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31306/s.66.2.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

迄今为止,甲醛(FA)是较常见的化学品之一,在世界各地的不同行业,特别是化工设施和医疗保健行业中广泛使用。由于其化学和物理特性,甲醛被广泛用于工作活动中。然而,由于其毒性和公认的致癌性,它也对工人的健康造成了威胁。对职业环境中的 FA 暴露进行评估引起了科学界的兴趣,从而开发出了多种分析仪器,用于评估长期和短期暴露。本文介绍并讨论了通过 2.4-二硝基苯肼 (DNPH) 活性空气采样甲醛 (FA) 参考方法和两种基于连续直读监测的非参考仪器(即 ProCeas® (AP2E) 和 NEMo XT (Ethera))进行等效测试的程序。FA 标准大气校准系统通过皮尔逊检验来检验参比方法。随后,在非参比方法和 DNPH 方法之间进行了 Passing-Bablok 检验,以确定可能存在的系统误差或比例误差,最后采用 Bland-Altman 图确定现场采样中参比方法和非参比方法记录值的平均偏差和方差。结果表明,非参考方法与 DNPH 方法之间具有良好的相关性,这表明它们可以应用于不同的职业环境中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Strategija za ocjenjivanje učinka formaldehida u anatomskom patološkom laboratoriju treći dio
To date, formaldehyde (FA) is one of the more common chemicals and its use is widespread around the world in different sectors, especially in chemical facilities and health care. FA is widely used in working activities owing to its chemical and physical properties. However, it also represents a concerning hazard for the workers’ health due to its toxicity and recognized carcinogenicity. The FA exposure evaluation in occupational setting has arisen interest in the scientific community that leads to the development of several analytical instruments in order to assess both long term and short-term exposure. The paper presents and discusses an equivalence tests procedure via the 2.4-dinitrophenylhydrazine (DNPH)-active air sampling formaldehyde (FA) reference method and two non-reference instruments based on continuous, direct reading monitoring, namely ProCeas® (AP2E) and NEMo XT (Ethera). The FA standard atmosphere calibration system was used to check the reference method by Pearson’s test. Subsequently, the Passing-Bablok test was carried out between the non-reference methods and the DNPH method for potential systematic or proportional errors, and finally the Bland-Altman plot was applied to determine the mean bias and the variances of the recorded values by the reference and non-reference methods in on-field sampling. The results showed a good correlation between the non-references method and the DNPH ones, suggesting their possible applications in heterogeneous occupational scenarios.
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
Sigurnost
Sigurnost Social Sciences-Safety Research
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信