Skip to main content
PMC home page
Occupational and Environmental Medicine logoLink to Occupational and Environmental Medicine
. 1998 Dec;55(12):795–804. doi: 10.1136/oem.55.12.795

Proposal for the assessment of quantitative dermal exposure limits in occupational environments: Part 1. Development of a concept to derive a quantitative dermal occupational exposure limit

P M Bos, D H Brouwer, H Stevenson, P J Boogaard, W L de Kort, J J van Hemmen
PMCID: PMC1757540  PMID: 9924440

Abstract

Dermal uptake of chemicals at the workplace may contribute considerably to the total internal exposure and so needs to be regulated. At present only qualitative warning signs--the "skin notations"--are available as instruments. An attempt was made to develop a quantitative dermal occupational exposure limit (DOEL) complementary to respiratory occupational exposure limits (OELs). The DOEL refers to the total dose deposited on the skin during a working shift. Based on available data and experience a theoretical procedure for the assessment of a DOEL was developed. A DOEL was derived for cyclophosphamide and 4,4-methylene dianiline (MDA) according to this procedure. The DOEL for MDA was tested for applicability in an actual occupational exposure scenario. An integrated approach is recommended for situations in which both dermal and respiratory exposures contribute considerably to the internal exposure of the worker. The starting point should be an internal health based occupational exposure limit--that is, the maximum dose to be absorbed without leading to adverse systemic effects. The proposed assessment of an external DOEL is then either based on absorption rate or absorption percentage. The estimation of skin penetration seems to be of crucial importance in this concept. If for a specific substance a maximal absorption rate can be estimated a maximal skin surface area to be exposed can be assessed which may then serve the purpose of a DOEL. As long as the actual skin surface exposed is smaller than this maximal skin surface area the internal OEL will not be exceeded, and therefore, no systemic health problems would be expected, independent of the dermal dose/unit area. If not, the DOEL may be interpreted as the product of dermal dose/unit area (mg/cm2) and exposed skin surface area (cm2). The proposed concept for a DOEL is relevant and can be made applicable for health surveillance in the occupational situation where dermal exposure contributes notably to the systemic exposure. Further research should show whether this concept is more generally applicable.

 

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (158.5 KB).

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Aitio A., Pekari K., Järvisalo J. Skin absorption as a source of error in biological monitoring. Scand J Work Environ Health. 1984 Oct;10(5):317–320. doi: 10.5271/sjweh.2323. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Alarie Y. Sensory irritation by airborne chemicals. CRC Crit Rev Toxicol. 1973 Nov;2(3):299–363. doi: 10.3109/10408447309082020. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Cherrie J. W., Robertson A. Biologically relevant assessment of dermal exposure. Ann Occup Hyg. 1995 Jun;39(3):387–392. doi: 10.1016/0003-4878(95)00016-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Dost A. A. A European meeting held to discuss dermal exposure monitoring and related issues, Brussels, Belgium, 21-23 June 1994. Ann Occup Hyg. 1995 Apr;39(2):241–255. doi: 10.1016/0003-4878(95)00001-u. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Fenske R. A. Dermal exposure assessment techniques. Ann Occup Hyg. 1993 Dec;37(6):687–706. doi: 10.1093/annhyg/37.6.687. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Fenske R. A., van Hemmen J. J. Occupational skin exposure to chemical substances: setting limits. Ann Occup Hyg. 1994 Aug;38(4):333–336. doi: 10.1093/annhyg/38.4.333-a. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Fiserova-Bergerova V., Pierce J. T., Droz P. O. Dermal absorption potential of industrial chemicals: criteria for skin notation. Am J Ind Med. 1990;17(5):617–635. doi: 10.1002/ajim.4700170507. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Fiserova-Bergerova V. Relevance of occupational skin exposure. Ann Occup Hyg. 1993 Dec;37(6):673–685. doi: 10.1093/annhyg/37.6.673. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Grandjean P., Berlin A., Gilbert M., Penning W. Preventing percutaneous absorption of industrial chemicals: the "skin" denotation. Am J Ind Med. 1988;14(1):97–107. doi: 10.1002/ajim.4700140111. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Hirst M., Tse S., Mills D. G., Levin L., White D. F. Occupational exposure to cyclophosphamide. Lancet. 1984 Jan 28;1(8370):186–188. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(84)92111-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Johanson G., Boman A. Percutaneous absorption of 2-butoxyethanol vapour in human subjects. Br J Ind Med. 1991 Nov;48(11):788–792. doi: 10.1136/oem.48.11.788. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Kao J., Carver M. P. Cutaneous metabolism of xenobiotics. Drug Metab Rev. 1990;22(4):363–410. doi: 10.3109/03602539009041089. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Kezić S., Mahieu K., Monster A. C., de Wolff F. A. Dermal absorption of vaporous and liquid 2-methoxyethanol and 2-ethoxyethanol in volunteers. Occup Environ Med. 1997 Jan;54(1):38–43. doi: 10.1136/oem.54.1.38. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Kompaore F., Tsuruta H. In vivo differences between Asian, black and white in the stratum corneum barrier function. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 1993;65(1 Suppl):S223–S225. doi: 10.1007/BF00381346. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Mouridsen H. T., Faber O., Skovsted L. The biotransformation of cyclophosphamide in man: analysis of the variation in normal subjects. Acta Pharmacol Toxicol (Copenh) 1974 Aug;35(2):98–106. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0773.1974.tb00729.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Mouridsen H. T., Faber O., Skovsted L. The metabolism of cyclophosphamide. Dose dependency and the effect of long-term treatment with cyclophosphamide. Cancer. 1976 Feb;37(2):665–670. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(197602)37:2<665::aid-cncr2820370209>3.0.co;2-d. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Paustenbach D. J. Assessment of the developmental risks resulting from occupational exposure to select glycol ethers within the semiconductor industry. J Toxicol Environ Health. 1988;23(1):29–75. doi: 10.1080/15287398809531094. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Scansetti G., Piolatto G., Rubino G. F. Skin notation in the context of workplace exposure standards. Am J Ind Med. 1988;14(6):725–732. doi: 10.1002/ajim.4700140612. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Schmähl D., Habs M. Carcinogenic action of low-dose cyclophosphamide given orally to Sprague-Dawley rats in a lifetime experiment. Int J Cancer. 1979 May 15;23(5):706–712. doi: 10.1002/ijc.2910230518. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Sessink P. J., van den Broek P. H., Bos R. P. Urinary cyclophosphamide excretion in rats after intratracheal, dermal, oral and intravenous administration of cyclophosphamide. J Appl Toxicol. 1991 Apr;11(2):125–128. doi: 10.1002/jat.2550110210. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. Wester R. C., Maibach H. I. Cutaneous pharmacokinetics: 10 steps to percutaneous absorption. Drug Metab Rev. 1983;14(2):169–205. doi: 10.3109/03602538308991388. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Wilschut A., ten Berge W. F., Robinson P. J., McKone T. E. Estimating skin permeation. The validation of five mathematical skin permeation models. Chemosphere. 1995 Apr;30(7):1275–1296. doi: 10.1016/0045-6535(95)00023-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Wilson H. K. Recent policy and technical developments in biological monitoring in the United Kingdom. Sci Total Environ. 1997 Jun 20;199(1-2):191–196. doi: 10.1016/s0048-9697(97)05495-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Occupational and Environmental Medicine are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES