何晓庆, 王祚懿, 陈强, 盛建荣, 张美辩. 应用美国EPA吸入风险评估模型评估3家医药化工企业职业健康风险[J]. 环境与职业医学, 2017, 34(1): 53-57. DOI: 10.13213/j.cnki.jeom.2017.16276
引用本文: 何晓庆, 王祚懿, 陈强, 盛建荣, 张美辩. 应用美国EPA吸入风险评估模型评估3家医药化工企业职业健康风险[J]. 环境与职业医学, 2017, 34(1): 53-57. DOI: 10.13213/j.cnki.jeom.2017.16276
HE Xiao-qing, WANG Zuo-yi, CHEN Qiang, SHENG Jian-rong, ZHANG Mei-bian. Application of US EPA inhalation risk assessment model to occupational health risk assessment in three pharmaceutical and chemical enterprises[J]. Journal of Environmental and Occupational Medicine, 2017, 34(1): 53-57. DOI: 10.13213/j.cnki.jeom.2017.16276
Citation: HE Xiao-qing, WANG Zuo-yi, CHEN Qiang, SHENG Jian-rong, ZHANG Mei-bian. Application of US EPA inhalation risk assessment model to occupational health risk assessment in three pharmaceutical and chemical enterprises[J]. Journal of Environmental and Occupational Medicine, 2017, 34(1): 53-57. DOI: 10.13213/j.cnki.jeom.2017.16276

应用美国EPA吸入风险评估模型评估3家医药化工企业职业健康风险

Application of US EPA inhalation risk assessment model to occupational health risk assessment in three pharmaceutical and chemical enterprises

  • 摘要: 目的 应用美国EPA吸入风险评估模型对3家化工制药企业进行职业病危害风险评估,评价该模型在职业病危害风险评估应用的适用性。

    方法 选择化工制药企业为研究对象,应用该模型对重点岗位进行风险评估。计算非致癌效应风险值和致癌风险值,判定化学物所致职业健康风险水平。

    结果 2家化工企业危害因素的非癌症危害商数(HQ值)为0.23~18.49,其中干渣装车岗位吸入硫化氢和磷化氢的HQ < 1,发生相应的非癌症健康风险的概率较低;其他岗位吸入危害因素的HQ > 1,发生相应的非癌症健康风险的概率较高。制药企业中存在盐酸的解析岗位和酸碱配置岗位鼻黏膜喉支气管增生的HQ分别为5.274和9.041,存在较高的非癌症健康风险。化工企业吸入四氯乙烯的癌症风险值(Risk值)为5.33×10-7,该岗位发生癌症的健康风险较低,吸入三氯甲烷的Risk值为1.02×10-3,该岗位发生癌症的健康风险较高。无法得到相应岗位工人吸入粉尘、二氧化硫、氟化氢、丙酮、氢氧化钠和接触噪声的职业健康风险结果。

    结论 美国EPA吸入风险评估模型在化工制药企业职业健康风险评估中有一定的应用价值和局限性,评估结果可以为企业的职业健康风险管理为提供科学依据。

     

    Abstract: Objective To evaluate the applicability of the inhalation risk assessment model provided by US Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) to occupational health risk assessment in three pharmaceutical and chemical enterprises.

    Methods Three pharmaceutical and chemical enterprises were chosen as study subjects. The US EPA inhalation risk assessment model was used to assess the occupational health risk levels of selected work stations, including cancer and non-cancer risks.

    Results The related hazard quotient (HQ) values of two chemical enterprises were 0.23-18.49. The HQ values of hydrogen sulfide and hydrogen phosphine inhalation at dry residual loading port were both less than 1, indicating low non-cancer health risks; the HQ values at other work stations were all more than 1, which indicated high non-cancer health risks. The HQ values for hyperplasia of nasal mucosa larynx and trachea caused by hydrogen chloride at two work stations of the selected pharmaceutical enterprise were 5.274 and 9.041 respectively, which indicated high non-cancer health risks. The Risk values of tetrachloroethylene inhalation was 5.33×10-7, indicating low risk of cancer; the Risk values of methenyl trichloride inhalation was 1.02×10-3, indicating high risk of cancer. The inhalation of dust, sulfur dioxide, hydrogen fluoride, acetone, sodium hydroxide, and the exposure to noise were not eligible to the US EPA model.

    Conclusion The US EPA inhalation risk assessment model is applicable to the occupational health risk assessment in pharmaceutical and chemical enterprises, though with limitations. The assessment results could provide scientific evidence for occupational health risk management in enterprises.

     

/

返回文章
返回