Exposure factors for cleaning, automotive care, and surface protection products for exposure assessments

Park, Ji Young; Lim, Miyoung; Yang, Wonho; Lee, Kiyoung

doi:10.1016/j.fct.2016.11.024

Cited by 10 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In previous studies that investigated exposure factors for household and personal care products, the actual users of the consumer products were considered when recruiting participants [ 11 , 15 , 22 ]. In this study, all the target consumer products were commonly used by adults, and therefore, all individuals included in this study were aged 19 years and older.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In general, when consumers use spray or liquid products, they might use gloves, a mask, or ventilate the area due to dermal contact and odor. A study investigated protective action taken to reduce exposure during use of cleaning, automotive care, and surface protection products [ 22 ]. In that study, except for household bleach (spray and liquid), the usage rates of gloves, masks, and ventilation were under 70%, 6.5%, and 45.0%, respectively.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In Korea, before the national exposure factors were disseminated, the input parameters from the RIVM were widely used. As several studies have already reported, exposure factors differ by country, race, and other factors [ 15 , 16 , 22 ]. Therefore, a national exposure database is needed to understand a country’s own consumer product exposure.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Determining Exposure Factors of Anti-Fogging, Dye, Disinfectant, Repellent, and Preservative Products in Korea

Lee

Kim

et al. 2018

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reliable exposure factors are essential to determine health risks posed by chemicals in consumer products. We analyzed five risk-concerned product categories (anti-fogging, dye, disinfectant, repellent, and preservative products) for 13 products (three car anti-fogging products, a lens anti-fogging product, two car dye products, two drain disinfectants, an air conditioner disinfectant, a chlorine-based disinfectant, a fabric repellent, an insect repellent for food, and a wood preservative) considered to be of high risk in order to determine exposure factors via web surveys and estimation of amount of product. Among the 3000 participants (1482 (49%) men) aged ≥19 years, drain disinfectants were used most frequently (38.2%); the rate of usage of the other products ranged between 1.1–24.0%. The usage rates for the consumer products differed by sex, age, income, and education. Some consumer products such as car and lens anti-fogging products, chlorine-based disinfectants, fabric repellents, and drain disinfectants were regularly used more than once a month, while car dye products, air conditioner disinfectants, insect repellents for food, and wood preservatives were not regularly used owing to the specific product purposes and seasonal needs. Our results could be used for managing or controlling chemical substances in consumer products and conducting accurate exposure assessments.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Determining Exposure Factors of Anti-Fogging, Dye, Disinfectant, Repellent, and Preservative Products in Korea

Lee

Kim

et al. 2018

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We used a 7-point scale and assigned points as follows: "Rarely" (1 point), "2-3 times a month" (2 points), "1-2 times a week" (3 points), "3-4 times a week" (4 points), "5-6 times a week" (5 points), "every day" (6 points) and "more than two times a day" (7 points). Assuming that the CHP use patterns vary, we made an operational definition of "CHP use patterns" as the most frequent response among the three categories, instead of the average value, to account for variations in CHP usage patterns among a population [64,65].…”

Section: Chp Use Patternsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Safety Behaviors to Reduce Risk of Using Chemical Household Products: An Application of the Risk Perception Attitude Framework

Lee

You

2020

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Various chemical household products (CHPs) can make life more convenient; however, CHP users have higher rates of chemical exposure and are faced with the risk of accidents associated with using these products. Safe use of CHPs requires that individuals perform safety-related behaviors such as reading and following CHP risk information. As such, it may be worthwhile to apply the Risk Recognition Attitude (RPA) framework to classify groups of CHP users and investigate whether there is a difference in the safety behaviors between them. Therefore, the objectives of this study are to (a) examine social determinants of each group in the RPA framework, (b) identify different policies that would be effective for each group, and (c) provide evidence to inform the development of effective policies and risk communication strategies that encourage safety behaviors. The study included 1537 subjects and used an ANOVA with a post-hoc Tukey test to examine practices of the four groups in terms of two safety behaviors. A multinomial logistic regression was performed to identify factors that influence the classification of the group types. The results confirmed that safety behaviors associated with using CHPs differed according to weak levels of efficacy beliefs. Two groups of particular concern for low rates of safety behaviors were those with lower education and income levels. Recommendations include (a) customized safety policies and risk communications based on RPA characteristics, (b) distinctive messaging for different groups, (c) policy support for vulnerable populations, and (d) implementing ‘user-centered’ rather than ‘substance-centered’ policies and communications for the public.

show abstract

“…In the USA, the study of use of products and exposure-related behaviors project provided data on usage patterns for many household products (Bennett et al, 2010). Exposure patterns may vary by country (Biesterbos et al, 2013;Park et al, 2015;Garcia-Hidalgo et al, 2017;Park et al, 2017). A national database of aggregate exposure information for household products is essential to conduct aggregate exposure and risk assessments.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Combined exposure pattern of household products used by consumers

Kim¹,

Hwang²,

Seok³

2019

J. Public Health Epidemiol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To accurately evaluate the health risk of consumers from the combined effects of substances in multiple used household products, data on co-use and multiple-use habits and practices of consumers necessarily constitute a fundamental element of the exposure assessment process. To understand the current combined use pattern of household products, reliable combined exposure data were investigated. Eleven household product categories were selected and divided by 40 product use purposes. This approach analyzed the information of single-use, co-use, and multipleuse patterns of the 11 products at home collected from 6,397 respondents. All possible multiple combinations of products and product usage categories were analyzed. As expected, the participants used several products and product usage categories simultaneously. The data yielded important personalized combined exposure patterns that can be used in exposure assessment for hazardous substances that are used as ingredients of products. Furthermore, this study investigated the combined exposure amount of 11 products to user at home. Aggregate exposure amount per month to user was calculated to be 7479.6 g/month (six products in 1 st survey) and 4056 g/month (five products in 2 nd survey). This study provides valuable information on the individual use patterns and circumstances of household product use by consumers. b 107 (multiple-users: DEP, IAP, ARP, TIP) c 281 (co-users: IAP, TIP) b 116 (multiple-users: IAP, ARP, TIP) c 445 (co-users: ARP, TIP) b 2030 aAFP, air-freshener; DEP, deodorant; IAP, ironing auxiliary; ARP, algea remover; TIP, toner and ink cartridge in printer. a numbers of respondents using single product, b numbers of respondents using two products, c numbers of respondents using multiple products.

show abstract

Exposure factors for cleaning, automotive care, and surface protection products for exposure assessments

Cited by 10 publications

References 17 publications

Determining Exposure Factors of Anti-Fogging, Dye, Disinfectant, Repellent, and Preservative Products in Korea

Determining Exposure Factors of Anti-Fogging, Dye, Disinfectant, Repellent, and Preservative Products in Korea

Safety Behaviors to Reduce Risk of Using Chemical Household Products: An Application of the Risk Perception Attitude Framework

Combined exposure pattern of household products used by consumers

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About