Providing a Risk Management Tool for Handling with Nanomaterial’s based on Control Banding Approach
Irtiqa Imini Pishgiri Masdumiyat (Safety Promotion and Injury Prevention),
Vol. 11 No. 3 (1402),
12 March 2024
,
Page 218 - 206
https://doi.org/10.22037/iipm.v11i3.44325
Abstract
Background and Aim: With the increase in the use of nanomaterials, there is a greater risk of exposure to harmful substances in occupational settings, especially in those with limited information on the impact on human health. As a result, the assessment of risks associated with these materials is often challenging, as traditional methods are not sufficient. The development and implementation of tools for classifying risk levels can be seen as an essential step in protecting the well-being of individuals engaged in work related to nanomaterials. Among the various approaches, Control Banding (CB) classification emerges as an effective and practicable qualitative technique for evaluating the potential health hazards linked to engineered nanomaterials. The primary objective of this study revolves around employing the Control Banding approach to evaluate and mitigate occupational risks stemming from the manipulation of nanomaterials.
Methods: The resources were examined in order to identify the factors that impact health hazards in workplaces that handle nanomaterials. This examination considered the potential risks associated with nanomaterials found in the Web of Science and Scopus databases, as well as citations from authoritative sources such as the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). After conducting a thorough analysis of the available literature, the hazards associated with chemical substances and exposure methods when working with nanomaterials were identified. This analysis further resulted in the determination of the risk and exposure score using the CB approach. Furthermore, an investigation was conducted on control measures related to the identified level of risk.
Results: The categorization of risk scores, determined by the approach of classifying control measures, yielded five distinct categories. These categories, ranging from HB1 as the lowest to HB5 as the highest level of risk, were established based on information pertaining to indicators such as acute toxicity, sensitization, stimulation, and organ damage. Similarly, the categorization of exposure scores, determined by the approach of classifying control measures, resulted in four distinct categories. These categories, ranging from EB1 as the lowest to EB4 as the highest level of exposure, were derived from information concerning the manufacturing methods and release power of various types of nanomaterials, taking into account the probability of exposure. Subsequently, by merging the categories corresponding to the risk score and exposure, the risk level was determined across five categories, with R1 representing the lowest and R5 representing the highest level of risk. In accordance with the classification approach, control measures were proposed based on each level of occupational risk when working with nanomaterials.
Conclusion: The nanomaterials risk management tool based on the approach of CB is an easy and qualitative method to evaluate and make decisions in order to reduce the risk of handing nanomaterials. In this approach, it is easy to achieve risk assessment results by identifying the inherent risks of a substance and predicting the probability of exposure. Using such tools in work environments can help professionals identify and remove obstacles and provide the possibility to communicate with managers.
Please cite this article as:
Naziri S.H, Pouyakian M, Sadegh Hassani S, Farhang Dehghan S. Providing a risk management tool for handling with nanomaterials based on Control Banding approach. Irtiqa Imini Pishgiri Masdumiyat. 2023;11(1):40-572023;11(3):210-222
- Engineered Nanomaterials, Risk Management, Tool, Control Banding.
How to Cite
References
References
Boverhof DR, David RM. Nanomaterial characterization: considerations and needs for hazard assessment and safety evaluation. Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry. 2010;396:953-61.
Europa O. E-fact 72: Tools for the management of nanomaterials in the workplace and prevention measures [E-Fact]. 2013 [19/06/2013]. Available from: [https://osha.europa.eu/en/publications/e-fact-72-tools-management-nanomaterials-workplace-and-prevention-measures].
Parveen S, Misra R, Sahoo SK. Nanoparticles: a boon to drug delivery, therapeutics, diagnostics and imaging. Nanomedicine: Nanotechnology, Biology and Medicine. 2012;8(2):147-66.
Fan AM, Alexeeff G. Nanotechnology and nanomaterials: toxicology, risk assessment, and regulations. Journal of nanoscience and nanotechnology. 2010;10(12):8646-57.
Roco MC, Mirkin CA, Hersam MC. Nanotechnology research directions for societal needs in 2020: summary of international study. Journal of nanoparticle research. 2011;13:897-919.
Lidén G. The European commission tries to define nanomaterials. Annals of Occupational Hygiene. 2011;55(1):1-5.
Beaucham C, Hodson L. General safe practices for working with engineered nanomaterials in research laboratories. 2012.
Hristozov DR, Gottardo S, Critto A, Marcomini A. Risk assessment of engineered nanomaterials: a review of available data and approaches from a regulatory perspective. Nanotoxicology. 2012;6(8):880-98.
T D. Nanotechnology Market By Type (Nanosensor and Nanodevice) and Application (Electronics, Energy, Chemical Manufacturing, Aerospace & Defense, Healthcare, and Others): Global Opportunity Analysis and Industry Forecast, 2021-2030 Allied Market Research2021 [
Maryam Saniejlal MHM. The Role and Place of Internationalization in Shaping Future of Nano Technology in Iran. Journal of Iran Futures Studies. 2020;5(1):25-48.
Product IN. Iran's total nanotechnology statistics, https://nanoproduct.ir/page/2995 2023 [Available from: https://nanoproduct.ir/page/2995.
Kuhlbusch T, Fissan H, Asbach C, editors. Nanotechnologies and environmental risks: measurement technologies and strategies. Nanomaterials: risks and benefits; 2009: Springer.
Oberdörster G, Maynard A, Donaldson K, Castranova V, Fitzpatrick J, Ausman K, et al. Principles for characterizing the potential human health effects from exposure to nanomaterials: elements of a screening strategy. Particle and fibre toxicology. 2005;2(1):1-35.
Schulte PA, Trout DB. Nanomaterials and worker health: medical surveillance, exposure registries, and epidemiologic research. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine. 2011:S3-S7.
Maynard AD, Aitken RJ. Assessing exposure to airborne nanomaterials: current abilities and future requirements. Nanotoxicology. 2007;1(1):26-41.
Organization WH. Reference methods for measuring airborne man-made mineral fibres (MMMF). Environmental Health (WHO-EURO): World Health Organization. Regional Office for Europe; 1985.
Monteiro-Riviere NA, Tran CL. Nanotoxicology: characterization, dosing and health effects: CRC Press; 2007.
Borm PJ, Robbins D, Haubold S, Kuhlbusch T, Fissan H, Donaldson K, et al. The potential risks of nanomaterials: a review carried out for ECETOC. Particle and fibre toxicology. 2006;3:1-35.
Donaldson K, Tran L, Jimenez LA, Duffin R, Newby DE, Mills N, et al. Combustion-derived nanoparticles: a review of their toxicology following inhalation exposure. Particle and fibre toxicology. 2005;2(1):1-14.
Schulte PA, Leso V, Niang M, Iavicoli I. Current state of knowledge on the health effects of engineered nanomaterials in workers: a systematic review of human studies and epidemiological investigations. Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health. 2019;45(3):217.
Manna P, Ghosh M, Ghosh J, Das J, Sil PC. Contribution of nano-copper particles to in vivo liver dysfunction and cellular damage: Role of IκBα/NF-κB, MAPKs and mitochondrial signal. Nanotoxicology. 2012;6(1):1-21.
Schulte P, Kuempel E, Drew N. Characterizing risk assessments for the development of occupational exposure limits for engineered nanomaterials. Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology. 2018;95:207-19.
Kuempel ED, Geraci CL, Schulte PA. Risk assessment and risk management of nanomaterials in the workplace: translating research to practice. Annals of occupational hygiene. 2012;56(5):491-505.
Iavicoli I, Fontana L, Pingue P, Todea AM, Asbach C. Assessment of occupational exposure to engineered nanomaterials in research laboratories using personal monitors. Science of The Total Environment. 2018;627:689-702.
Kuempel E, Castranova V, Geraci C, Schulte P. Development of risk-based nanomaterial groups for occupational exposure control. Journal of Nanoparticle Research. 2012;14:1-15.
Pouyakian M, Khatabakhsh A, Yazdi M, Zarei E. Optimizing the Allocation of Risk Control Measures Using Fuzzy MCDM Approach: Review and Application. Linguistic Methods Under Fuzzy Information in System Safety and Reliability Analysis. 2022:53-89.
Belton V, Stewart T. Multiple criteria decision analysis: an integrated approach: Springer Science & Business Media; 2002.
OECD. Important issues on risk assessment of manufactured nanomaterials. Series on the Safety of Manufactured Nanomaterials. 2012;33:1-57.
Savolainen K, Alenius H, Norppa H, Pylkkänen L, Tuomi T, Kasper G. Risk assessment of engineered nanomaterials and nanotechnologies—a review. Toxicology. 2010;269(2-3):92-104.
Council NR. Risk assessment in the federal government: managing the process. 1983.
ISO/TS 12901-2:2014. Nanotechnologies - Occupational risk management applied to engineered nanomaterials - Part 2: Use of the control banding approach. International Organization for Standardization. Geneva (Switzerland).
Demir E. A review on nanotoxicity and nanogenotoxicity of different shapes of nanomaterials. Journal of Applied Toxicology. 2021;41(1):118-47.
Zalk DM, Paik SY, Swuste P. Evaluating the control banding nanotool: a qualitative risk assessment method for controlling nanoparticle exposures. Journal of nanoparticle research. 2009;11:1685-704.
Baig N, Kammakakam I, Falath W. Nanomaterials: A review of synthesis methods, properties, recent progress, and challenges. Materials Advances. 2021;2(6):1821-71.
Paik SY, Zalk DM, Swuste P. Application of a pilot control banding tool for risk level assessment and control of nanoparticle exposures. Annals of Occupational Hygiene. 2008;52(6):419-28.
Gatoo MA, Naseem S, Arfat MY, Mahmood Dar A, Qasim K, Zubair S. Physicochemical properties of nanomaterials: implication in associated toxic manifestations. BioMed research international. 2014;2014.
Fubini B, Fenoglio I, Tomatis M, Turci F. Effect of chemical composition and state of the surface on the toxic response to high aspect ratio nanomaterials. Nanomedicine. 2011;6(5):899-920.
Schneider T, Brouwer DH, Koponen IK, Jensen KA, Fransman W, Duuren-Stuurman V, et al. Conceptual model for assessment of inhalation exposure to manufactured nanoparticles. Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology. 2011;21(5):450-63.
Woskie SR, Bello D, Virji MA, Stefaniak AB. Understanding workplace processes and factors that influence exposures to engineered nanomaterials. International journal of occupational and environmental health. 2010;16(4):365-77.
Ostiguy C, Lapointe G, Ménard L, Cloutier Y, Trottier M, Boutin M, et al. Nanoparticles: actual knowledge about occupational health and safety risks and prevention measures. Institut de recherche Robert-Sauvé en santé et en sécurité du travail (IRSST). 2006.
Hristozov D, Zabeo A, Alstrup Jensen K, Gottardo S, Isigonis P, Maccalman L, et al. Demonstration of a modelling-based multi-criteria decision analysis procedure for prioritisation of occupational risks from manufactured nanomaterials. Nanotoxicology. 2016;10(9):1215-28.
Oomen AG, Steinhäuser KG, Bleeker EA, van Broekhuizen F, Sips A, Dekkers S, et al. Risk assessment frameworks for nanomaterials: Scope, link to regulations, applicability, and outline for future directions in view of needed increase in efficiency. NanoImpact. 2018;9:1-13.
Isigonis P, Hristozov D, Benighaus C, Giubilato E, Grieger K, Pizzol L, et al. Risk governance of nanomaterials: review of criteria and tools for risk communication, evaluation, and mitigation. Nanomaterials. 2019;9(5):696.
Hristozov D, Gottardo S, Semenzin E, Oomen A, Bos P, Peijnenburg W, et al. Frameworks and tools for risk assessment of manufactured nanomaterials. Environment international. 2016;95:36-53.
Brown RC. Air filtration: an integrated approach to the theory and applications of fibrous filters. (No Title). 1993.
Yokel RA, MacPhail RC. Engineered nanomaterials: exposures, hazards, and risk prevention. Journal of occupational medicine and toxicology. 2011;6(1):1-27.
Hirst N, Brocklebank M, Ryder M. Containment systems: a design guide: IChemE; 2002.
INSO 19816-1:2015. Nanotechnologies -Occupational risk management applied to engineered nanomaterials Part 1: Principles and approaches. Institute of Standards and Industrial Research of Iran.
Fonseca AS, Kuijpers E, Kling KI, Levin M, Koivisto AJ, Nielsen SH, et al. Particle release and control of worker exposure during laboratory-scale synthesis, handling and simulated spills of manufactured nanomaterials in fume hoods. Journal of Nanoparticle Research. 2018;20:1-15.
European Environmental Agency. Late lessons of early warning II. EEA Report No 1/2013. ISSN 1725‑9177. doi: 10 .2800/73322.
- Abstract Viewed: 366 times
- pdf 5 (فارسی) Downloaded: 102 times