The relationship between cleaning product exposure and respiratory and skin symptoms among healthcare workers in a hospital setting: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Prevalence of Health Effects Due to Disinfectant Exposure and Its Impact on Selected Physiological Parameters Among Class D Workers: A Descriptive Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND

Cleaning and disinfection, particularly to reduce the risk of infection, constitute a significant portion of the work performed by medical personnel and other staff in hospital environments. In addition to the routine housekeeping tasks carried out by cleaning staff, these duties may involve medical specialists such as radiographers, respiratory therapists, physiotherapists, nurses, and class D workers responsible for cleaning and disinfecting surfaces and equipment. Various chemicals can be used for these tasks, including hydrogen peroxide, bleach, chlorine, and bacillocid. This study focused on estimating the prevalence of health effects of disinfectant exposure on physiological parameters among class D workers in selected hospitals in Sangli, Maharashtra.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An analytical cross-sectional study was conducted using a quantitative descriptive approach between April 2024 and July 2024. A total of 270 participants were selected through a non-probability purposive sampling technique from the chosen hospitals, ensuring adherence to all ethical considerations. Data were collected using a disinfectant health effects on physiological parameters assessment checklist and a demographic information sheet for participants. After providing comprehensive details about the study, informed consent was obtained from all participants. The analysis was conducted using frequency and percentage distributions.

RESULTS

Out of 270 class D workers, the survey found that 45.56% (123) of the participants reported having a sore nose due to hydrogen peroxide disinfectant exposure, 42.59% (115) reported throat irritation from glutaraldehyde disinfectant exposure, 40% (108) reported a persistent cough from sodium hypochlorite exposure, 37.4% (101) reported headaches from isopropyl alcohol disinfectant exposure, and 45.92% (124) reported eye irritation from benzalkonium chloride disinfectant exposure. Additionally, 59.62% (161) experienced skin irritation due to exposure to orthophthalaldehyde, and 58.15% (157) experienced nasal issues due to the bacillocid solution. Furthermore, 29.26% (79) experienced throat irritation from exposure to hypochlorite disinfectants, 44.05% (119) experienced nausea due to choline exposure, and 50.74% (137) experienced nausea from bleach solution exposure for more than six hours during their previous five years of employment.

CONCLUSIONS

The study concluded that most class D workers in Sangli hospitals experienced physical health effects, including irritation of the throat, nose, upper respiratory tract, eyes, and skin, as well as nausea. Identifying optimal practices to minimize worker exposure while ensuring patient safety is crucial. Based on the present study's findings, hospital managers should develop safety resources, conduct educational campaigns, and provide class D employees with the necessary training to manage disinfectant exposure effectively.

Respiratory quaternary ammonium and volatile organic compound exposures experienced by home care aides during residential bathroom cleaning using conventional and green products

INTRODUCTION

US home care (HC) aide visits to clients' homes typically involve cleaning and disinfecting (C&D) environmental surfaces, particularly in bathrooms. Some ingredients in C&D products are associated with respiratory illness: sodium hypochlorite (bleach), quaternary ammonium compounds (QACs), and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). This study assessed and compared aides' respiratory exposures to specific VOCs and QACs while using 2 conventional and 1 "green" household C&D spray products during bathroom cleaning. Measured exposures were compared to ingredients listed on publicly available sources.

METHODS

Three C&D products were selected with principal active disinfecting ingredients: 1% to 5% sodium hypochlorite by weight ("bleach-based"); 0.1% to 1% QACs ("QACs-based"); and 0.05% thymol ("green"). Twenty-two aides were recruited to perform C&D tasks in a simulated residential bathroom constructed in an environmental monitoring laboratory. A balanced experimental study design involved each aide visiting the lab 4 times to perform typical cleaning tasks with the 3 products and distilled water (as a control), randomly assigned across the 4 visits. Aides wore air sampling equipment for breathing zone samples: canisters to collect whole air for VOC analyses and filter cassettes for QACs analyses.

RESULTS

Aides performed 84 cleaning visits contributing approximately 20 air samples each for VOCs and QACs, for each of the 3 products and distilled water. In total, 38 unique VOCs were identified in the canister whole air samples: 20 in the QACs-based product samples, 15 in the bleach-based, and 10 in the green. Most VOCs were not listed in publicly available sources of cleaning product ingredients. Toxicity information was limited. Few VOCs had occupational exposure limits. The QACs-based product generated QACs aerosol: benzalkonium chloride (BAC)12 (geometric mean (GM) = 6.98 µg/m3), BAC14 (GM=2.97 µg/m3), BAC16 (GM=0.78 µg/m3); and the 3 QACs summed (GM=10.86 µg/m3).

DISCUSSION

The use of C&D spray products for residential cleaning can generate respiratory exposures to complex mixtures of volatile and nonvolatile compounds. Notably, we measured aerosols containing QACs during the use of the QACs-based product. Dermal is usually considered the main route of exposure because QACs are nonvolatile salts. This study provides evidence that QACs inhalation exposure should be recognized and minimized in addition to the well-accepted dermal exposure routes. The green product generated the fewest VOCs. However, more toxicity information is needed on the health impacts of green C&D products. Spraying of C&D products, conventional and green, should be avoided.

CONCLUSIONS

Aides' respiratory health should be protected from chemical exposures while performing C&D in home care.

Occupational exposure, carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic risk assessment of formaldehyde in the pathology labs of hospitals in Iran

Formaldehyde, a known carcinogenic compound, is commonly used in various medical settings. The objective of this study was to assess the carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic risks associated with occupational exposure to formaldehyde. This study was conducted in the pathology labs of four hospitals in Tehran. Cancer and non-cancer risks were evaluated using the quantitative risk assessment method proposed by the United States environmental protection agency (USEPA), along with its provided database known as the integrated risk information system (IRIS). Respiratory symptoms were assessed using the American thoracic society (ATS) questionnaire. The results indicated that 91.23% of exposure levels in occupational groups exceed the NIOSH standard of 0.016 ppm. Regarding carcinogenic risk, 41.03% of all the studied subjects were in the definite carcinogenic risk range (LCR > 10-4), 23.08% were in the possible carcinogenic risk range (10-5 < LCR < 10-4), and 35.90% were in the negligible risk range (LCR < 10-6). The highest index of occupational carcinogenesis was observed in the group of lab technicians with a risk number of 3.7 × 10-4, followed by pathologists with a risk number of 1.7 × 10-4. Furthermore, 23.08% of the studied subjects were within the permitted health risk range (HQ < 1.0), while 76.92% were within the unhealthy risk range (HQ > 1.0). Overall, the findings revealed significantly higher carcinogenic and non-carcinogenic risks among lab technicians and pathologists. Therefore, it is imperative to implement control measures across various hospital departments to mitigate occupational formaldehyde exposure levels proactively. These findings can be valuable for policymakers in the health sector, aiding in the elimination or reduction of airborne formaldehyde exposure in work environments.

Acute occupational inhalation injuries-United States, 2011-2022

BACKGROUND

Inhalation injuries due to acute occupational exposures to chemicals are preventable. National surveillance of acute inhalation exposures is limited. This study identified the most common acute inhalation exposure-related incidents by industry sector among US workers.

METHODS

To characterize inhalation-related injuries and their exposures during April 2011-March 2022, state and federal records from the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Occupational Safety and Health Information System (OIS) accident database were analyzed. Industry-specific injury, hospitalization, and fatality rates were calculated.

RESULTS

The most frequent acute inhalation incidents investigated by OSHA were caused by inorganic gases (52.9%) such as carbon monoxide (CO) or acids, bases, and oxidizing chemical agents (12.9%) such as anhydrous ammonia. The largest number of fatal and nonfatal injuries were reported in the manufacturing (28.6%) and construction (17.2%) sectors.

CONCLUSIONS

Workers were affected by acute inhalation exposures in most industries. Using this surveillance, employers can recognize frequently-occurring preventable acute inhalation exposures by industry, such as inorganic gases in the manufacturing sector, and implement prevention measures. Training of workers on exposure characteristics and limits, adverse health effects, and use of protective equipment by exposure agent can prevent inhalation injuries.

Recruitment strategies in marginalized industries for occupational health research: an example in a pilot study of cleaning staff during COVID-19

This commentary describes challenges in recruiting workers from marginalized industries with examples from a pilot study of janitors, custodians, and maids and their experiences of cleaning and disinfection protocols during COVID-19 and potentially associated respiratory symptoms. Recruitment strategies included contacting a local hospital, national workers' unions, and a large Arizona employer; using online Facebook groups; and contacting Arizona maid service companies and a school district. English and Spanish online and hard copy surveys about cleaning protocols and respiratory symptoms were used. Participants could also participate in online/phone interviews. Worker's compensation, liability, and confidentiality were concerns across organizations. Online surveys yielded unreliable data. Hard copy surveys were used due to workers' limited technology access. We reflect upon these challenges and discuss other strategies for recruiting from marginalized populations for occupational health research. Building trust with organizations and workers and considering technology access may ultimately increase recruitment feasibility.

Prevalence of work-related skin symptoms and associated factors among tertiary hospital workers exposed to cleaning agents in Southern Africa

INTRODUCTION

Working with cleaning products is associated with occupational contact dermatitis in health workers (HWs), but information on predictors for these outcomes is limited.

OBJECTIVES

This study investigated the prevalence of work-related skin symptoms (WRSS) and associated factors in HWs exposed to cleaning agents in two Southern African tertiary hospitals.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study of 697 HWs used an interviewer-administered questionnaire and assessed for atopy using Phadiatop.

RESULTS

HWs' median age was 42 years, 77.0% were female and 42.5% were atopic. The prevalence of WRSS in the last 12 months was 14.8%, 12.3% had probable contact dermatitis (PCD) and 3.2% had probable contact urticaria (PCU). Technicians (ORadj 3.91) and tasks involving cleaning and disinfection of skin wounds (ORadj 1.98) were associated with WRSS in the past year. Factors associated with PCD included sterilizing instruments, disinfecting skin before procedures and use of wound adhesives. Factors associated with PCU included specimen preparation using formalin, medical instrument sterilization tasks, and skin/wound cleaning and disinfection. Appropriate glove use when performing patients' skin/wound care was protective against WRSS.

CONCLUSIONS

Tasks involving cleaning and disinfecting patients' skin and wounds were associated with WRSS in HWs, especially when performed without gloves.

A Novel Application of Risk-Risk Tradeoffs in Occupational Health: Nurses' Occupational Asthma and Infection Risk Perceptions Related to Cleaning and Disinfection during COVID-19

BACKGROUND

Nurses face the risk of new onset occupational asthma (OA) due to exposures to cleaning and disinfection (C&D) agents used to prevent infections in healthcare facilities. The objective of this study was to measure nurses' preferences when presented with simultaneous OA and respiratory viral infection (e.g., COVID-19) risks related to increased/decreased C&D activities.

METHODS

Nurses working in healthcare for ≥1 year and without physician-diagnosed asthma were recruited for an online anonymous survey, including four risk-risk tradeoff scenarios between OA and respiratory infection with subsequent recovery (Infect and Recovery) or subsequent death (Infect and Death). Nurses were presented with baseline risks at hypothetical "Hospital 1", and were asked to choose Hospital 2 (increased OA risk to maintain infection risk), Hospital 3 (increased infection risk to maintain OA risk), or indicate that they were equally happy.

RESULTS

Over 70% of nurses were willing to increase infection risk to maintain baseline OA risk if they were confident they would recover from the infection. However, even when the risk of infection leading to death was much lower than OA, most nurses were not willing to accept a larger (but still small) risk of death to avoid doubling their OA risk. Age, work experience, and ever having contracted or knowing anyone who has contracted a respiratory viral infection at work influenced choices.

CONCLUSIONS

We demonstrate the novel application of a risk-risk tradeoff framework to address an occupational health issue. However, more data are needed to test the generalizability of the risk preferences found in this specific risk-risk tradeoff context.