Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2019 Jan;26(1):896-904. doi: 10.1007/s11356-018-3701-8. Epub 2018 Nov 11.

Is the World Health Organization predicted exposure assessment model for space spraying of insecticides applicable to agricultural farmers?

Author information

1
Centre for Environment and Population Health, Griffith School of Medicine, Griffith University, 170 Kessel Road, Nathan, Brisbane, QLD, 4111, Australia. d.phung@griffith.edu.au.
2
Centre for Environment and Population Health, Griffith School of Medicine, Griffith University, 170 Kessel Road, Nathan, Brisbane, QLD, 4111, Australia.
3
Griffith School of Science and Environment, Griffith University, 170 Kessel Road, Nathan, Brisbane, QLD, 4111, Australia.

Abstract

Agricultural farmers in developing countries are at high risk of pesticide exposure and adverse effects because of unsafe practices and inappropriate legislation. Biological monitoring is considered a useful tool for pesticide exposure assessment; however, its use is limited in developing countries due to a lack of techniques and resources such as laboratory analysis, trained staff and budgets. This study examines whether the World Health Organization predicted exposure assessment model (WHO-PEAM) is a suitable alternative tool for assessing insecticide exposure among agricultural farmers. WHO-PEAM was used to predict daily doses (PDD) of chlorpyrifos for a group of Vietnamese rice farmers using a set of exposure parameters obtained from a questionnaire survey of participant famers during a field study. These results were compared to absorbed daily doses (ADD) of chlorpyrifos for the farmers measured using a biological monitoring program, in which 24-h urine samples were collected and analysed for the chlorpyrifos metabolite, 3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridinol (TCP) using LC/MS. Validation of the model results was tested using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test (WSR) and two-way mixed-model intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). The mean of total ADD was 20 μg/kg/day while that of total PDD was 22 μg/kg/day. The WSR test revealed no statistically significant difference in the average values of ADDT and PDDT. ICC indicated substantial agreement for both single and average measures between ADDT and PDDT (ICC, 0.62 and 0.77, respectively). The results demonstrate that a refined WHO-PEAM model can be readily used as a field method, without biological monitoring, to evaluate chlorpyrifos exposure among agricultural farmers in Vietnam and similar developing countries.

KEYWORDS:

Agricultural farmer; Biological monitoring; Exposure assessment; Insecticide; WHO exposure model

PMID:
30417237
DOI:
10.1007/s11356-018-3701-8
[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Springer
Loading ...
Support Center