Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2015 Apr 29;12(5):4670-96.
doi: 10.3390/ijerph120504670.

Dermal exposure assessment to pesticides in farming systems in developing countries: comparison of models

Comparative Study

Dermal exposure assessment to pesticides in farming systems in developing countries: comparison of models

Camilo Lesmes-Fabian. Int J Environ Res Public Health. .

Erratum in

  • Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2015 Aug;12(8):9264. Fabian, Camilo Lesmes [corrected to Lesmes-Fabian, Camilo]; Binder, Claudia R [removed]

Abstract

In the field of occupational hygiene, researchers have been working on developing appropriate methods to estimate human exposure to pesticides in order to assess the risk and therefore to take the due decisions to improve the pesticide management process and reduce the health risks. This paper evaluates dermal exposure models to find the most appropriate. Eight models (i.e., COSHH, DERM, DREAM, EASE, PHED, RISKOFDERM, STOFFENMANAGER and PFAM) were evaluated according to a multi-criteria analysis and from these results five models (i.e., DERM, DREAM, PHED, RISKOFDERM and PFAM) were selected for the assessment of dermal exposure in the case study of the potato farming system in the Andean highlands of Vereda La Hoya, Colombia. The results show that the models provide different dermal exposure estimations which are not comparable. However, because of the simplicity of the algorithm and the specificity of the determinants, the DERM, DREAM and PFAM models were found to be the most appropriate although their estimations might be more accurate if specific determinants are included for the case studies in developing countries.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Radar diagram with the multi-criteria analysis for the evaluated models for dermal exposure assessment (NI: Not Included; NG: No Guidance; NK: No Knowledge Required; NR: Not Reliable).

References

    1. Repetto R., Baliga S. Pesticides and the Immune System: The Public Health Risks. World Resources Institute; Washington, DC, USA: 1996. - PubMed
    1. Pimentel D., Culliney T.W., Bashore T. Integrated Pest Management World Textbook. Universidad de Minnesota; New York, NY, USA: 1996. Public health risks associated with pesticides and natural toxins in foods.
    1. Feola G., Binder C.R. Why don’t pesticide applicators protect themselves? Exploring the use of personal protective equipment among Colombian smallholders. Int. J. Occup. Environ. Health. 2010;16:11–23. doi: 10.1179/oeh.2010.16.1.11. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ramos L.M., Querejeta G.A., Flores A.P., Hughes E.A., Zalts A., Montserrat J.M. Potential dermal exposure in greenhouses for manual sprayers: Analysis of the mix/load, application and re-entry stages. Sci. Total Environ. 2010;408:4062–4068. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.05.020. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Feola G., Binder C.R. Identifying and investigating pesticide application types to promote a more sustainable pesticide use. The case of smallholders in Boyacá, Colombia. Crop Prot. 2010;29:612–622. doi: 10.1016/j.cropro.2010.01.008. - DOI

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources