首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Environmental Health Perspectives >Monitoring Indoor Exposure to Organophosphate Flame Retardants: Hand Wipes and House Dust
【2h】

Monitoring Indoor Exposure to Organophosphate Flame Retardants: Hand Wipes and House Dust

机译:监测室内有机磷阻燃剂的暴露量:手拭和室内灰尘

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Background: Organophosphate flame retardants (PFRs) are becoming popular replacements for the phased-out polybrominated diphenyl ether (PBDE) mixtures, and they are now commonly detected in indoor environments. However, little is known about human exposure to PFRs because they cannot be easily measured in blood or serum.Objectives: To investigate relationships between the home environment and internal exposure, we assessed associations between two PFRs, tris(1,3-dichloropropyl) phosphate (TDCIPP) and triphenyl phosphate (TPHP), in paired hand wipe and dust samples and concentrations of their metabolites in urine samples (n = 53). We also assessed short-term variation in urinary metabolite concentrations (n = 11 participants; n = 49 samples).Methods: Adult volunteers in North Carolina, USA, completed questionnaires and provided urine, hand wipe, and household dust samples. PFRs and PBDEs were measured in hand wipes and dust, and bis(1,3-dichloropropyl) phosphate (BDCIPP) and diphenyl phosphate (DPHP), metabolites of TDCIPP and TPHP, were measured in urine.Results: TDCIPP and TPHP were detected frequently in hand wipes and dust (> 86.8%), with geometric mean concentrations exceeding those of PBDEs. Unlike PBDEs, dust TDCIPP and TPHP levels were not associated with hand wipes. However, hand wipe levels were associated with urinary metabolites. Participants with the highest hand wipe TPHP mass, for instance, had DPHP levels 2.42 times those of participants with the lowest levels (95% CI: 1.23, 4.77). Women had higher levels of DPHP, but not BDCIPP. BDCIPP and DPHP concentrations were moderately to strongly reliable over 5 consecutive days (intraclass correlation coefficients of 0.81 and 0.51, respectively).Conclusions: PFR exposures are widespread, and hand-to-mouth contact or dermal absorption may be important pathways of exposure.Citation: Hoffman K, Garantziotis S, Birnbaum LS, Stapleton HM. 2015. Monitoring indoor exposure to organophosphate flame retardants: hand wipes and house dust. Environ Health Perspect 123:160–165; 
机译:背景:有机磷阻燃剂(PFR)逐渐成为逐步淘汰的多溴二苯醚(PBDE)混合物的替代品,现在在室内环境中普遍检测到。然而,人们对PFR的接触知之甚少,因为它们在血液或血清中不易测量。目的:为了研究家庭环境与内部暴露之间的关系,我们评估了两种PFR(磷酸三(1,3-二氯丙基)酯)之间的关联。 (TDCIPP)和磷酸三苯酯(TPHP)在成对的手擦拭和灰尘样品中以及尿液样品中其代谢产物的浓度(n = 53)。我们还评估了尿中代谢物浓度的短期变化(n = 11名参与者; n = 49个样本)。方法:美国北卡罗来纳州的成年志愿者填写了调查表,并提供了尿液,手擦和家庭灰尘样本。测定尿布中的PFR和PBDEs,并测量尿液中TDCIPP和TPHP的代谢产物双(1,3-二氯丙基)磷酸酯(BDCIPP)和磷酸二苯酯(DPHP)。结果:经常检测到TDCIPP和TPHP手工抹布和灰尘(> 86.8%),其几何平均浓度超过多溴二苯醚的浓度。与多溴二苯醚不同,尘土中的TDCIPP和TPHP含量与手擦无关。但是,手擦水平与尿液代谢物有关。例如,手擦拭TPHP量最高的参与者的DPHP水平是最低水平的参与者的2.42倍(95%CI:1.23,4.77)。妇女的DPHP含量较高,而BDCIPP没有。 BDCIPP和DPHP的浓度在连续5天中为中等至高度可靠(类内相关系数分别为0.81和0.51)。结论:PFR暴露广泛,手口接触或皮肤吸收可能是重要的暴露途径。 :霍夫曼K,Garantziotis S,Birnbaum LS,斯台普顿HM。 2015。监测室内对有机磷酸酯阻燃剂的接触:手巾和室内灰尘。环境健康透视123:160–165;

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号