Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Occupational Exposures to Antineoplastic Drugs and Ionizing Radiation in Canadian Veterinary Settings: Findings From a National Surveillance Project

  • Quantitative Research
  • Published:
Canadian Journal of Public Health Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

Although veterinary workers may encounter various occupational health hazards, a national characterization of exposures is lacking in Canada. This study used secondary data sources to identify veterinary exposure prevalence for ionizing radiation and antineoplastic agents, as part of a national surveillance project.

Methods

For ionizing radiation, data from the Radiation Protection Bureau of Health Canada were used to identify veterinarians and veterinary technicians monitored in 2006. This was combined with Census statistics to estimate a prevalence range and dose levels. For antineoplastic agents, exposure prevalence was estimated using statistics on employment by practice type and antineoplastic agent usage rates, obtained from veterinary licensing bodies and peer-reviewed literature.

Results

In 2006, 7,013 (37% of all) Canadian veterinary workers were monitored for ionizing radiation exposure. An estimated 3.3% to 8.2% of all veterinarians and 2.4% to 7.2% of veterinary technicians were exposed to an annual ionizing radiation dose above 0.1 mSv, representing a total of between 536 and 1,450 workers. All monitored doses were below regulatory limits. For antineoplastic agents, exposure was predicted in up to 5,300 (23%) of all veterinary workers, with an estimated prevalence range of 22% to 24% of veterinarians and 20% to 21% of veterinary technicians.

Conclusion

This is the first national-level assessment of exposure to ionizing radiation and antineoplastic agents in Canadian veterinary settings. These hazards may pose considerable health risks. Exposures appeared to be low, however our estimates should be validated with comprehensive exposure monitoring and examination of determinants across practice areas, occupations, and tasks.

Résumé

Objectifs

Bien que les agents vétérinaires puissent être exposés à divers dangers pour la santé au travail, il manque au Canada une caractérisation nationale de ce type d’exposition. Dans le cadre d’un projet de surveillance national, nous avons utilisé des sources de données secondaires pour cerner la prévalence des expositions aux rayonnements ionisants et aux antinéoplasiques en milieu vétérinaire.

Méthode

Pour les rayonnements ionisants, les données du Bureau de la radioprotection de Santé Canada ont servi à identifier les vétérinaires et les techniciens vétérinaires surveillés en 2006. Nous avons combiné ces données aux chiffres du Recensement pour estimer un intervalle de prévalence et des niveaux de dose. Pour les antinéoplasiques, la prévalence de l’exposition a été estimée à l’aide des statistiques sur l’emploi par type de pratique et des taux d’utilisation des antinéoplasiques, lesquels ont été obtenus dans les revues évaluées par les pairs et auprès des organismes de réglementation de la profession vétérinaire.

Résultats

En 2006, 7 013 (37%) des agents vétérinaires canadiens ont été surveillés pour leur exposition aux rayonnements ionisants. On estime qu’entre 3,3% et 8,2% des médecins vétérinaires et entre 2,4% et 7,2% des techniciens vétérinaires ont été exposés à une dose annuelle de rayonnements ionisants supérieure à 0,1 mSv, soit entre 536 et 1 450 personnes en tout. Toutes les doses surveillées étaient en deçà des limites réglementaires. Pour les antinéoplasiques, une exposition était prévisible chez jusqu’à 5 300 agents vétérinaires (soit 23%), avec un intervalle de prévalence estimatif de 22% à 24% des médecins vétérinaires et de 20% à 21% des techniciens vétérinaires.

Conclusion

Il s’agit de la première évaluation nationale de l’exposition aux rayonnements ionisants et aux antinéoplasiques en milieu vétérinaire au Canada. Ces dangers peuvent poser des risques considérables pour la santé. Les niveaux d’exposition semblent être faibles, mais nos estimations devraient être validées par une surveillance complète de l’exposition et par un examen des déterminants selon la sphère de pratique, la profession et la tâche.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Epp T, Waldner C. Occupational health hazards in veterinary medicine: Physical, psychological, and chemical hazards. Can Vet J 2012;53(2):151–57.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Shuhaiber S, Einarson A, Radde I, Sarkar M, Koren G. A prospective-controlled study of pregnant veterinary staff exposed to inhaled anesthetics and x-rays. Int J Occup Med Environ Health 2002;15(4):363–73.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Benoit J, Ponce F, Falcy M, Keck G. Anti-cancéreux en médecine vétérinaire. Risques liés à leur utilisation et prévention. Montreal, QC: INRS, 2008. Available at: https://doi.org/www.inrs.fr/accueil/produits/mediatheque/doc/publications.html?refINRS=TF 173 (Accessed July 22, 2013).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Sont W. 2008 Report on Occupational Radiation Exposures in Canada. Ottawa, ON: Health Canada, 2009. Available at: https://doi.org/publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2012/sc-hc/H126-1-2008-eng.pdf (Accessed July 22, 2013).

    Google Scholar 

  5. IARC Monographs: Radiation Volume 100 D. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer, 2012. Available at: https://doi.org/monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol100D/ (Accessed July 22, 2013).

    Google Scholar 

  6. Jeyaretnam J, Jones H. Physical, chemical and biological hazards in veterinary practice. Aust Vet J 2000;78(11):751–58.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Elliot KM, Mayer MN. Cancer treatment therapies. Can Vet J 2009;50(7):771–72.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Falck K, Gröhn P, Sorsa M, Vainio H, Heinonen E, Holsti LR. Mutagenicity in urine of nurses handling cytostatic drugs. Lancet 1979;1(8128):1250–51.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Paoloni M, Khanna C. Translation of new cancer treatments from pet dogs to humans. Nature Reviews Cancer 2008;8(2):147–56.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Perrin T. The Business Of Urban Animals Survey: The facts and statistics on companion animals in Canada. Can Vet J 2009;50(1):48–52.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Meijster T, Fransman W, Veldhof R, Kromhout H. Exposure to antineoplastic drugs outside the hospital environment. Ann Occup Hyg 2006;50(7):657–64.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Canadian Veterinary Medical Association. Veterinary Statistics, March 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Statistics Canada. 2006 Census of Population. Ottawa, ON; 2006 Jan. Available at: https://doi.org/www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2006/indexeng.cfm (Accessed July 22, 2013).

    Google Scholar 

  14. Shirangi A, Fritschi L, Holman C. Prevalence of occupational exposures and protective practices in Australian female veterinarians. Aust Vet J 2007;85(1–2):32–38.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Sont W. 2007 Report on Occupational Radiation Exposures in Canada. Ottawa: Health Canada, 2008. Available at: https://doi.org/publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2009/sc-hc/H128-1-08-542E.pdf (Accessed July 22, 2013).

    Google Scholar 

  16. The Canadian Association of Animal Health Technologists and Technicians. Canadian Association of Animal Health Technologists/Technicians Survey 2002–2003. Available at: https://doi.org/caahtt-acttsa.ca/membership-in-caahtt/2002-2003-professional-survey (Accessed July 22, 2013).

    Google Scholar 

  17. Poole A, Shane S, Kearney M, Rehn W. Survey of occupational hazards in companion animal practices. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1998;212(9):1386–88.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. van Soest E, Fritschi L. Occupational health risks in veterinary nursing: An exploratory study. Aust Vet J 2004;82(6):346–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Cave T, Norman P, Mellor D. Cytotoxic drug use in treatment of dogs and cats with cancer by UK veterinary practices (2003 to 2004). J Small Anim Pract 2007;48(7):371–77.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Bigelow S, Schulz H, Dobish R, Chambers C. Antineoplastic agent workplace contamination study: The Alberta Cancer Board Pharmacy perspective Phase III. J Oncol Pharm Pract 2009;15(3):157–60.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Hon C, Teschke K, Chua P, Venners S, Nakashima L. Occupational exposure to antineoplastic drugs: Identification of job categories potentially exposed throughout the hospital medication system. Safety and Health at Work 2011;2(3):273–81.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Couch J, Gibbins J, Connor TH. Evaluation of chemotherapy drug exposure at a veterinary teaching hospital in Michigan. J Occup Environ Hyg 2013;10(4):D45–D51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Health and Welfare Canada. Radiation Protection in Veterinary Medicine–Recommended Safety Procedures for Installation and Use of Veterinary X-ray Equipment–Safety Code 28. 1991. Available at: https://doi.org/www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ewhsemt/pubs/radiation/91ehd-dhm151/index-eng.php#app1 (Accessed October 19, 2013).

    Google Scholar 

  24. OHS Regulation & Related Materials. Part 7 Noise, Vibration, Radiation and Temperature. Richmond, BC: Workers’ Compensation Board of British Columbia (WorkSafeBC), 2005. Available at: https://doi.org/www2.worksafebc.com/publications/OHSRegulation/Part7.asp#SectionNumber:7.22 (Accessed July 22, 2013).

    Google Scholar 

  25. The Radiation Health and Safety Regulations, 2005. Regina, SK: Government of Saskatchewan, 2005. Available at: https://doi.org/www.publications.gov.sk.ca/details.cfm?p=9623 (Accessed July 22, 2013).

  26. Fritschi L. Cancer in veterinarians. Occup Environ Med 2000;57(5):289–97.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Shirangi A, Fritschi L, Holman C, Bower C. Birth defects in offspring of female veterinarians. J Occup Environ Med 2009;51(5):525–33.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Schenker MB, Samuels SJ, Green RS, Wiggins P. Adverse reproductive outcomes among female veterinarians. Am J Epidemiol 1990;132(1):96–106.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Steele L, Wilkins J. Occupational exposures and risks of spontaneous abortion among female veterinarians. Int J Occup Environ Health 1996;2(1):26–36.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Valanis B, Vollmer W, Steele P. Occupational exposure to antineoplastic agents: Self-reported miscarriages and stillbirths among nurses and pharmacists. J Occup Environ Med 1999;41(8):632–38.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, 2206 East Mall (3rd Floor), Vancouver, BC, V6T 1Z3, Canada

    Amy L. Hall MSc, Hugh W. Davies PhD (Associate Professor) & Cheryl E. Peters MSc

  2. Occupational Cancer Research Centre, Cancer Care Ontario, Toronto, ON, Canada

    Paul A. Demers PhD (Director)

  3. Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, BC, Canada

    Anne-Marie Nicol PhD (Assistant Professor)

Authors
  1. Amy L. Hall MSc
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hugh W. Davies PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Paul A. Demers PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Anne-Marie Nicol PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Cheryl E. Peters MSc
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amy L. Hall MSc.

Additional information

Acknowledgements: The authors thank the National Dose Registry for their assistance and advice on the use of Health Canada’s National Dose Registry data. We also thank Canada’s veterinary medical and technician/technologist associations for providing data on the numbers of veterinarians by practice type. Funding for this study and the CAREX Canada project was provided by the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer.

Conflict of Interest: None to declare.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hall, A.L., Davies, H.W., Demers, P.A. et al. Occupational Exposures to Antineoplastic Drugs and Ionizing Radiation in Canadian Veterinary Settings: Findings From a National Surveillance Project. Can J Public Health 104, e460–e465 (2013). https://doi.org/10.17269/cjph.104.4167

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.17269/cjph.104.4167

Key words

Mots clés

Search

Navigation