Firefighters are occupationally exposed to products of combustion containing polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and flame retardants (FRs), potentially contributing to their increased risk for certain cancers. Personal protective equipment (PPE), including firefighter hoods, helps to reduce firefighters' exposure to toxic substances during fire responses by providing a layer of material on which contaminants deposit prior to reaching the firefighters skin. However, over time hoods that retain some contamination may actually contribute to firefighters' systemic dose. We investigated the effectiveness of laundering to reduce or remove contamination on the hoods, specifically PAHs and three classes of FRs: polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), non-PBDE flame retardants (NPBFRs), and organophosphate flame retardants (OPFRs). Participants in the study were grouped into crews of 12 firefighters who worked in pairs by job assignment while responding to controlled fires in a single-family residential structure. For each pair of firefighters, one hood was laundered after every scenario and one was not. Bulk samples of the routinely laundered and unlaundered hoods from five pairs of firefighters were collected and analyzed. Residual levels of OPFRs, NPBFRs, and PAHs were lower in the routinely laundered hoods, with total levels of each class of chemicals being 56-81% lower, on average, than the unlaundered hoods. PBDEs, on average, were 43% higher in the laundered hoods, most likely from cross contamination. After this initial testing, four of the five unlaundered exposed hoods were subsequently laundered with other heavily exposed (unlaundered) and unexposed (new) hoods. Post-laundering evaluation of these hoods revealed increased levels of PBDEs, NPBFRs, and OPFRs in both previously exposed and unexposed hoods, indicating cross contamination. For PAHs, there was little evidence of cross contamination and the exposed hoods were significantly less contaminated after laundering (76% reduction; p ¼ 0.011). Further research is needed to understand how residual contamination on hoods could contribute to firefighters' systemic exposures.
Fire training may expose firefighters and instructors to hazardous airborne chemicals that vary by the training fuel. We conducted area and personal air sampling during three instructional scenarios per day involving the burning of two types (designated as alpha and bravo) of oriented strand board (OSB), pallet and straw, or the use of simulated smoke, over a period of 5 days. Twenty-four firefighters and ten instructors participated. Firefighters participated in each scenario once (separated by about 48 hr) and instructors supervised three training exercise per scenarios (completed in 1 day). Personal air samples were analyzed for polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and hydrogen cyanide during live-fire scenarios (excluding simulated smoke). Area air samples were analyzed for acid gases, aldehydes, isocyanates, and VOCs for all scenarios. For the live-fire scenarios, median personal air concentrations of benzene and PAHs exceeded applicable shortterm exposure limits and were higher among firefighters than instructors. When comparing results by type of fuel, personal air concentrations of benzene and PAHs were higher for bravo OSB compared to other fuels. Median area air concentrations of aldehydes and isocyanates were also highest during the bravo OSB scenario, while pallet and straw produced the highest median concentrations of certain VOCs and acid gases. These results suggest usage of self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) by both instructors and firefighters is essential during training fires to reduce potential inhalation exposure. Efforts should be taken to clean skin and clothing as soon as possible after live-fire training to limit dermal absorption as well.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.