Hygienic assessment of occupational risk for workers during pre- and post-emergence herbicide treatments of sunflower crops

O.O.  Novokhatska; M.V.  Kondratiuk; A.M.  Grynzovskyi; I.M.  Pelo; V.V.  Babiienko

doi:10.26641/2307-0404.2024.1.301252

Authors

O.O. Novokhatska Bogomolets National Medical University, T. Shevchenko blvd., 13, Kyiv, 01601, Ukraine https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1834-7953
M.V. Kondratiuk Bogomolets National Medical University, T. Shevchenko вlvd., 13, Kyiv, 01601, Ukraine https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5500-6352
A.M. Grynzovskyi Bogomolets National Medical University, T. Shevchenko вlvd., 13, Kyiv, 01601, Ukraine https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8391-5294
I.M. Pelo Bogomolets National Medical University, T. Shevchenko вlvd., 13, Kyiv, 01601, Ukraine https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4764-102X
V.V. Babiienko Odesa National Medical University, Valikhovsky Lane, 2, Odessa, 65082, Ukraine https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4597-9908

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.26641/2307-0404.2024.1.301252

Keywords:

pesticides, working conditions, complex and combined professional risk

Abstract

Modern agriculture extensively uses pesticide formulations at various stages of crop growth. Sunflower cultivation accounts for 31% of the global production. Assessing the occupational risk associated with pesticide application in sunflower farming is of paramount importance. Improper handling and application of pesticide formulations can have immediate adverse effects on workers, leading to acute poisoning, long-term health consequences, and the potential for chronic illnesses, including neurotoxic effects. The aim of this study was to conduct a hygienic assessment of the professional risk faced by workers during pre- and post-emergence herbicide applications in sunflower cultivation. This assessment was carried out to establish the regulations for their safe usage. Research samples after the application of the herbicides AGAT, GARPUN, KORVUS, and PARUS (patches from overalls, gloves, skin swabs from exposed areas (face-neck, hands), air samples (atmospheric air, working zone and drift zone). The assessment of professional risk was conducted in accordance with the methodological recommendations provided by experts from the L.I. Medved's Research Center of Preventive Toxicology, Food and Chemical Safety, Ministry of Health, Ukraine (State Enterprise). Statistical analysis of the results was carried out using the licensed statistical software packages MedStat v.5.2 (Copyright^© 2003-2019) and Microsoft^® Excel^® for Microsoft 365 MSO (Version 2305, Build 16.0.16501.20074). It has been determined that under real conditions, during pre- and post-emergence herbicide applications in sunflower cultivation using AGAT, GARPUN, KORVUS, PARUS preparations, while adhering to recommended agrotechnical and hygiene safety regulations, the inhalation, dermal, complex, and combined (AGAT and PARUS) risks for applicators are 0.0409±0.0179, 0.0429±0.0193, 0.0838±0.0224, and 0.1557±0.1322 a.u., respectively, and for tractor operators – 0.0818±0.0358, 0.0425±0.0192, 0.1243±0.0356, and 0.2347±0.1567 a.u., respectively. There is no observed increase in hygiene standards in the workplace atmosphere and in the air of the potential drift zone. It has been proven that the professional risk of their use does not exceed permissible limits (<1). It has been determined that during the performance of technological operations, the mentioned risks in applicators and tractor operators did not differ significantly (p>0.05). However, a significant difference was found in the proportion of percutaneous risk (42.7±17.4% in applicators compared to 34.8±17.0% in tractor operators; p=0.034). The regulations for the safe use of the investigated pesticide formulations have been substantiated. Statistical analysis of the obtained results revealed that the values of inhalation, dermal, and combined risks during the application of these pesticides did not significantly differ during the various technological operations (applicators and tractor operators) (p>0.05). The values of the combined comprehensive risk associated with the use of the studied preparations also did not show significant differences (p>0.05). The proportion of dermal risk was significantly higher in applicators compared to this parameter determined in tractor operators (p=0.034).

References

Anfarovych YH, Popov DO. [Ways of intensifying agricultural production]. Bulletin of the Student Scientific Society. 2019;2:242-3. Ukrainian.

Bubalo NN, Balan GM. [Metabolic disorders, dehydrogenic effects and imbalance of adipose tissue hormones in patients undergoing acute and chronic into-xication with pesticides]. Modern problems of toxicology, radiation and chemical safety. 2018;2-3:51-70. Ukrainian. doi: https://doi.org/10.33273/2663-4570-2018-82-83-2-3-51-70

Ilkiv L. [Economic aspects of sunflower production]. Young Scientist. 2019;10(74):661-5. Ukrainian. doi: https://doi.org/10.32839/2304-5809/2019-10-74-139

Tkachenko IV, Antonenko AM, Borysenko AA, Korshun OM, Lipavska AO. [Hygienic assessment of occupational risk when using pesticide formulations based on spiroxamine and abamectin for agricultural workers]. Ukrainian Journal of Occupational Health. 2021;17(4):253-60. Ukrainian. doi: https://doi.org/10.33573/ujoh2021.04.253

Vavrinevych OP, Antonenko AM, Omelchuk ST. [The results of monitoring studies to assess occupational risk in the application of pesticide formulations in the agro-industrial sector of Ukraine]. Ukrainian Journal of Occupational Health. 2018;1(54):24-31. Ukrainian. doi: https://doi.org/10.33573/ujoh2018.01.024

[Study, assessment and reduction of the risk of inhalation and percutaneous exposure of pesticides to persons who work with them or may be exposed during and after chemical protection of plants and other objects. Methodological recommendations. Order of the Ministry of Health I'm from Ukraine 2009 May 13 No. 324]. [Internet]. 2009 [cited 2023 Aug 01]. Ukrainian. Available from: https://ips.ligazakon.net/document/MOZ9481

US Environmental Protection Agency Office of Pesticide Programs. Occupational Pesticide Handler Unit Exposure Surrogate Reference Table [Internet]. 2021 [cited 2023 Aug 01]. Available from: https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2021-05/documents/occupational-pesticide-handler-unit-exposure-surrogate-reference-table-may-2021.pdf

World Health Organization. WHO Generic Risk Assessment Models for Vector Control Products. [Internet]. [cited 2023 Aug 01]. Available from: https://extranet.who.int/pqweb/vector-control-products/who-generic-risk-assessment-models-vector-control-products

Guidance on the assessment of exposure of operators, workers, residents and bystanders in risk assessment of plant protection products [Internet]. EFSA Journal. 2022 [cited 2023 Aug 01];20(1). Available from: https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7032 doi: https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2022.7032

Mandic-Rajcevic S, Rubino FM, Ariano E, Cottica D, Negri S, Colosio C. Exposure duration and absor-bed dose assessment in pesticide-exposed agricultural workers: Implications for risk assessment and modeling. Int J Hyg Environ Health. 2019;222(3):494-502. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheh.2019.01.006

Kongtip P, Tingsa T, Yoosook W, Chantanakul S. Health risk assessment and biomarkers of chlorpyrifos in rice farmers. J Health Res. 2009;23(1):23-9.

Kour G, Kothari R, Dhar S, Pathania D. Nanoma-terials and heavy metals: environmental risk assessment and remediation strategies for wastewater. In: Legacy and Emerging Contaminants in Water and Wastewater: Monitoring, Risk Assessment and Remediation Techniques. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2022. p. 21-46. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-95443-7_2

Guryanov VG, Lyakh YuYe, Pariy VD, Korotky OV, Chaliy OV, Chaliy KO, et al. [Analysis of Medical Research Results using the EZR Package (R-statistics). Handbook of Biostatistics]. Kyiv: Vistka; 2018. 208 p. Ukrainian.

Diez DC, Getinkaya-Rundel M, Barr CD. Open-Intro Statistics. Fourth Edition. OpenIntro; 2019. 408 p.

EFSA (European Food Safety Authority). Conclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance imazamox. EFSA Journal. 2016;14(4):4432. doi: https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2016.4432

Syracuse Environmental Research Associates. Human Health and Ecological Risk Assessment. Final report. Syracuse Environmental Research Associates, Inc.; 2011. 203 p.

Environmental Protection Authority. Science memo for application to import or manufacture Boxer Gold for release (APP203736). Environmental Protection Authority. SCIENCE MEMO; 2020. 255 р.

European Food Safety Authority. Conclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance propisochlor. EFSA Journal. 2010;8(9):1769. doi: https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2010.1769

Cheminova Agro France S.A.S. DPX-LDY15 28.6SG (ALLIE MAX SX). Registration report. Part A. Risk Management. National assessment France (renewal of authorisation and label extension). National Assessment – Country – FRANCE; 2019. 40 р.

European Food Safety Authority. Conclusion on the peer review of the pesticide risk assessment of the active substance terbuthylazine. EFSA Journal. 2011;9(1):1969. doi: https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2011.1969