The Conduct of Field Studies to Evaluate the Exposure of Operators, Workers, and Bystanders to Pesticides

  • Graham Chester
Part of the NATO · Challenges of Modern Society book series (NATS, volume 19)


The evaluation of exposure is an integral part of risk assessment for product safety and regulatory assessment purposes. The purpose of this document is to review the rationales for the possible approaches, the available methods of pesticide exposure assessment and to provide guidance on the determination of exposure to, and absorption of, pesticides by operators, workers and bystanders. The assessment of exposure to bystanders in the indoor environment is beyond the scope of this guidance document. A set of guidelines is appended and further detailed information on the proposed methods can be obtained from published guidelines and references given in this document. The guidance may be useful also to those investigators involved in post-registration surveillance or routine monitoring of exposure to pesticides. The guidance is provided essentially for the measurement of exposure and absorbed dose for quantitative risk assessment. It is not intended to cover biological effect monitoring which may be used as an adjunct to exposure or absorbed dose measurement.


Biological Monitoring Inhalation Exposure Percutaneous Absorption Dermal Exposure Spray Solution 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Abbott, I.M., Bonsall, J.L., Chester, G., Hart, T.B., and Turnbull, G.J., 1987, Worker exposure to a herbicide applied with ground sprayers in the United Kingdom, Am. Ind. Hyg. Assoc. J. 48: 167–175.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alessio, L., Bolin, A., Dell’Orto, A., Toffoletto, F., and Ghezzio, I., 1985, Reliability of urinary creatinine as a parameter used to adjust values of urinary biological indicators, Int. Arch. Occup. Environ. Health 55: 99–106.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berkow, S.G., 1931, Value of surface area proportions in the prognosis of cutaneous burns and scalds, Amer. J. Surg. 11: 315–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chester, G., Dick, J., Loftus, N.J., Woollen, B.H., and Anema, B.H., 1990, The effectiveness of protective gloves in reducing dermal exposure to, and absorption of, the herbicide fluazifop-P-butyl by mixer-loader-applicators using tractor sprayers, 7th. Int. Congr. of Pesticide Chemistry, Vol III, p. 378, IUPAC.Google Scholar
  5. Curry, P., and Iyengar, S., 1992, Comparison of exposure assessment guidelines for pesticides, Rev. Environ. Contam. Toxicol. 129: 79–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Davis, J.E., 1980, Minimizing occupational exposure to pesticides: Personal monitoring, Residue Rev. 75: 35–50.Google Scholar
  7. Durham, W.F., and Wolfe, H.T., 1962, Measurement of the exposure of workers to pesticides, Bull. WHO 26: 75–91.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Fenske, R.A., 1987, Assessment of dermal exposure to pesticides: a comparison of the patch technique and video-imaging/fluorescent tracer technique, in: Sixth International Congress on Pesticide Chemistry IUPAC, 579–82.Google Scholar
  9. GIFAP, Groupement International des Associations Nationales de Fabricants de Produits Agrochemiques, 1990. Monitoring studies in the assessment of field worker exposure to pesticides. Technical Monograph No. 14, Bruxelles, Belgium.Google Scholar
  10. Henderson, P.Th., Brouwer, D.H., Opdam, J.J.G., Stevenson, H., and Stouten, J.Th.J., 1993, Risk assessment for worker exposure to agricultural pesticides: Review of a workshop, Ann. Occup. Hyg. 37 (5): 499–507.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Lewis, R.G., 1976, Sampling and analysis of airborne pesticides in air pollution from pesticides and agricultural processes, R.E. Lee Jr., ed., CRC Press, Cleveland, Ohio.Google Scholar
  12. Mull, R., and McCarthy, J.F., 1986, Guidelines for conducting mixer-loader-applicator studies, Vet. Hum. Toxicol. 28 (4): 328–336.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. NACA, National Agricultural Chemicals Association, 1985, Guidelines for Conducting Biological Monitoring - Applicator Exposure Studies, NACAGoogle Scholar
  14. Washington, D.C. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, 1992, GLP Consensus Document. The Application of the GLP Principles to Field Studies, Environment Monograph No. 50, OECD Series on Principles of Good Laboratory Practice and Compliance Monitoring No. 6.Google Scholar
  15. Peoples, S.A., and Knaak, J., 1982, Monitoring pesticide blood cholinesterase and analysing blood and urine for pesticides and their metabolites in pesticide residues and exposure, in: ACS Symp. Series No. 182:41–57Google Scholar
  16. J.R. Plimmer, ed., American Chemical Society, Washington, D.C. PHED, 1992, Pesticide Handlers Exposure Database. United States Environmental Protection Agency, Health and Welfare Canada, National Agricultural Chemicals Association.Google Scholar
  17. Popendorf, W.J., and Leffingwell, J.T., 1982, Regulating organophosphate pesticide residues for farmworker protection, Residue Rev. 82: 125–201.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Thongsinthusak, T., Ross, J.H., and Meinders, D., 1993, Guidance for the preparation of human pesticide exposure documents, HS-1612, May 4, California Environmental Protection Agency, Worker Health and Safety Branch.Google Scholar
  19. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1986, Pesticide Assessment Guidelines, Subdivision U, Applicator Exposure Monitoring, U.S. EPA, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  20. Van Dyk, L.P., and Visweswariah, K., 1975, Pesticides in air: Sampling methods, Residue Rev. 55: 91–134.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Van Heemstra-Lequin, E.A.H., and Van Sittert, N.J., eds, 1986, Biological monitoring of workers manufacturing, formulating and applying pesticides, Tox. Lett. 33:1–236, Elsevier, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  22. Vincent, J.H., and Mark, D., 1987, Comparison of criteria for defining inspirable aerosol and the development of appropriate samplers, Am. Ind. Hyg. Assoc. J. 48: 451–457.Google Scholar
  23. Wang, R.G.M., Franklin, C.A., Honeycutt, R.C., and Reinert, J.C., 1989, “Biological Monitoring for Pesticide Exposure: Measurement, Estimation and Risk Reduction”, ACS Symp. Series No. 382, American Chemical Society, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  24. Wolfe, H.R., 1976, Field exposure to airborne pesticides, in: Air Pollution from Pesticides and Agricultural Processes, R.E. Lee, Jr., ed., CRC Press, Cleveland, Ohio.Google Scholar
  25. Woollen, B.H., 1993, Biological monitoring for pesticide absorption, Ann. Occup. Hyg. 37 (5): 525–540.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. World Health Organization, 1975, Survey of exposure to organophosphorus pesticides in agriculture. Standard Protocol, VBC/75. 9, WHO, Geneva.Google Scholar
  27. World Health Organization, 1982, Field surveys of exposure to pesticides. Standard Protocol, VBC/82. 1, WHO, Geneva.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Graham Chester
    • 1
  1. 1.Stewardship & Safety Department FernhurstZENECA AgrochemicalsHaslemere, SurreyEngland

Personalised recommendations