IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/riskan/v34y2014i7p1336-1358.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Dermal Versus Total Uptake of Benzene from Mineral Spirits Solvent During Parts Washing

Author

Listed:
  • Kenneth T. Bogen
  • Patrick J. Sheehan

Abstract

Quantitative approaches to assessing exposure to, and associated risk from, benzene in mineral spirits solvent (MSS), used widely in parts washing and degreasing operations, have focused primarily on the respiratory pathway. The dermal contribution to total benzene uptake from such operations remains uncertain because measuring in vivo experimental dermal uptake of this volatile human carcinogen is difficult. Unprotected dermal uptake involves simultaneous sustained immersion events and transient splash/wipe events, each yielding residues subject to evaporation as well as dermal uptake. A two‐process dermal exposure framework to assess dermal uptake to normal and damaged skin was applied to estimate potential daily dermal benzene dose (Dskin) to workers who used historical or current formulations of recycled MSS in manual parts washers. Measures of evaporation and absorption of MSS dermally applied to human subjects were modeled to estimate in vivo dermal uptake of benzene in MSS. Uncertainty and interindividual variability in Dskin was characterized by Monte Carlo simulation, conditioned on uncertainty and/or variability estimated for each model input. Dermal exposures are estimated to average 33% of total (inhalation + dermal) benzene parts washing dose, with approximately equal predicted portions of dermal dose due to splash/wipe and to continuous contact with MSS. The estimated median (95th percentile) dermal and total daily benzene doses from parts washing are: 0.0069 (0.024) and 0.025 (0.18) mg/day using current, and 0.027 (0.085) and 0.098 (0.69) mg/day using historical, MSS solvents, respectively.

Suggested Citation

  • Kenneth T. Bogen & Patrick J. Sheehan, 2014. "Dermal Versus Total Uptake of Benzene from Mineral Spirits Solvent During Parts Washing," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 34(7), pages 1336-1358, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:34:y:2014:i:7:p:1336-1358
    DOI: 10.1111/risa.12166
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/risa.12166
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/risa.12166?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Patrick Sheehan & Kenneth T. Bogen & Jeffrey Hicks & Emily Goswami & Gregory Brorby & Edmund C. Lau & Brian Ott, 2010. "Benzene Inhalation by Parts Washers: New Estimates Based on Measures of Occupational Exposure to Solvent Coaromatics," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(8), pages 1249-1267, August.
    2. Kenneth T. Bogen, 1995. "Methods to Approximate Joint Uncertainty and Variability in Risk," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 15(3), pages 411-419, June.
    3. Kenneth T. Bogen, 2013. "Dermal Uptake of 18 Dilute Aqueous Chemicals: In Vivo Disappearance‐Method Measures Greatly Exceed In Vitro‐Based Predictions," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 33(7), pages 1334-1352, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Adam M. Finkel & George Gray, 2018. "Taking the reins: how regulatory decision-makers can stop being hijacked by uncertainty," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 38(2), pages 230-238, June.
    2. Kenneth T. Bogen, 2005. "Risk Analysis for Environmental Health Triage," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(5), pages 1085-1095, October.
    3. S. N. Rai & D. Krewski, 1998. "Uncertainty and Variability Analysis in Multiplicative Risk Models," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(1), pages 37-45, February.
    4. A. E. Ades & G. Lu & J. P. T. Higgins, 2005. "The Interpretation of Random-Effects Meta-Analysis in Decision Models," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 25(6), pages 646-654, November.
    5. H. Christopher Frey & David E. Burmaster, 1999. "Methods for Characterizing Variability and Uncertainty: Comparison of Bootstrap Simulation and Likelihood‐Based Approaches," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(1), pages 109-130, February.
    6. Lee, Chang-Ju & Lee, Kun Jai, 2006. "Application of Bayesian network to the probabilistic risk assessment of nuclear waste disposal," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 91(5), pages 515-532.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:riskan:v:34:y:2014:i:7:p:1336-1358. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1539-6924 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.