THE PROBLEM OF REGULATING FUNGICIDES ON THE SKIN SURFACE FOR OCCUPATIONAL SKIN DISEASE IN AGRICULTURAL WORKERS’ RISK PREDICTION

Abstract

The aim. To establish the norms of fungicides on the skin surface and predicting the risk of occupational skin pathology in agricultural workers to develop measures to prevent diseases caused by dermal exposure to pesticides. Materials and methods. The natural experiment was performed in accordance with modern requirements (European Food Safety Authority (2022), and the risk assessment was carried out according to the Recommendations (Approved by the Ministry of Health of Ukraine No. 324 issued on 13.05.2009) with different methods of spraying techniques: rod, air blast fan spraying, pre-sowing, aviation, knapsack treatment. 17 series of natural experiments were performed, and the air of the working zone area (n =56) and dermal exposure (n =56) were analyzed for each worker with different pesticide application methods. Quantitative determination of pesticide content was carried out by gas-liquid and high-performance liquid chromatography methods. The results were statistically processed using a package of licensed statistical programs MedStat v.5.2 (Copyright © 2003-2019) and Microsoft® Excel® for Microsoft 365 MSO. Results. It was established that there is pesticide contamination, mainly of the gloves of tank filling operators when preparing working solutions. No contamination of the skin surface was detected; only pesticide residues were present on the surface of the workers’ overalls. A comparison of the exposure dose in case of percutaneous exposure during the performance of technological operations with different methods of processing, dermal equivalents of Acceptable Operator Exposure Level of pesticide to workers’ skin (DE AOEL) and the allowable dermal dose for professional contingents (ADderm) and the hazard coefficients by dermal exposure (HCderm) showed that that dermal exposure during individual technological operations with different processing methods had a reliable difference between processing methods, but there is no difference within one application method. Conclusions. During the comparison of the hazard coefficients for dermal exposure, calculated according to different models, no significant difference was found between the risks calculated according to DE AOEL and ADderm for individual technological operations in various treatment methods, except for the operator who performed knapsack treatment and the risk calculated according to ADderm is significantly lower compared to the DE AOEL risk.