2009
DOI: 10.13031/2013.28886
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Use of Engineering Controls and Personal Protective Equipment by Certified Pesticide Applicators

Abstract: A convenience survey of 702 certified pesticide applicators was conducted in three states to assess the use of 16 types of engineering controls and 13 types of personal protective equipment (PPE). Results showed that 8 out of 16 engineering devices were adopted by more than 50% of the respondents. The type of crop, size of agricultural operation, and the type of pesticide application equipment were found to influence the adoption of engineering controls. Applicators working on large farms, users of boom and hy… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 31 publications
(27 reference statements)
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…One study observed very little to no penetration through fabrics thicker than 0.8 mm, regardless of other factors [54], with workpants providing much greater protection than thinner work shirts [59], In addition, although garments made of both barrier and non-barrier fabrics have been shown to decrease dermal exposure [60], greater protection is afforded by waterproof polypropylene fabrics than by cotton garments [61]. For example, an Italian study found penetration through cotton clothing to range from 11.2% to 26.8%, whereas penetration through synthetic material was <2.4% [62], although a study of US citrus farmers found little difference between synthetic materials and woven garments [63].…”
Section: Ppe For Dermal Pesticide Exposurementioning
confidence: 99%
“…One study observed very little to no penetration through fabrics thicker than 0.8 mm, regardless of other factors [54], with workpants providing much greater protection than thinner work shirts [59], In addition, although garments made of both barrier and non-barrier fabrics have been shown to decrease dermal exposure [60], greater protection is afforded by waterproof polypropylene fabrics than by cotton garments [61]. For example, an Italian study found penetration through cotton clothing to range from 11.2% to 26.8%, whereas penetration through synthetic material was <2.4% [62], although a study of US citrus farmers found little difference between synthetic materials and woven garments [63].…”
Section: Ppe For Dermal Pesticide Exposurementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The use of sixteen types of engineering controls and thirteen types of personal protective equipment (PPE) was studied using the information obtained from 702 certified pesticide applicators (Coffman et al, 2009). The results of this study showed that 8 engineering control devices were used out of 16 by more than 50% of the applicators.…”
Section: Policies and Preventionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Engineering controls have been found to reduce exposure for pesticide applicators when used in conjunction with appropriate PPE. A limitation to engineering controls highlighted in this study is the cost and the reliance on employer compliance in order to be effective (Coffman, et al, 2009).…”
Section: Engineering Controlsmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…Engineering controls are another intervention method that has been studied to reduce occupational pesticide exposure (Coffman et al, 2009). Some examples of engineering controls to reduce pesticide exposure include: multiple nozzle bodies, lowdrift nozzles, air-induction nozzles, and tank rinse systems.…”
Section: Engineering Controlsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation