三种分类控制工具在二氧化钛生产企业职业健康风险评估中的应用  

Application of three control banding tools to occupational health risk assessment of titanium dioxide manufacturing factory

作　　者：徐华东[1] 赵琳[1] 唐仕川[2] 张济[3] 孔凡玲[4] 贾光[1] Xu Huculong Zhao Lin Tang Shichuau Zhaug Ji Kong Fanling Jia Guaug(Department of Occupational and Environmental Health Sciences, School of Public Health, Peking University, Beijing 100191, China)

机构地区：[1]北京大学公共卫生学院劳动卫生与环境卫生学系,100191 [2]北京市劳动保护科学研究所职业安全健康北京市重点实验室 [3]山东省济南市疾病预防控制中心环境与职业卫生所 [4]山东省疾病预防控制中心职业与环境卫生监测评价所

出　　处：《中华劳动卫生职业病杂志》2016年第12期905-910,共6页Chinese Journal of Industrial Hygiene and Occupational Diseases

基　　金：国家科技支撑计划项目（2014BAI12B04）;北京市科学技术研究院项目（PXM2016_178304_000020）

摘　　要：目的运用3种基于分类控制技术的纳米材料风险评估工具对二氧化钛生产企业进行风险评估，探索和验证适合二氧化钛生产企业的职业健康风险评估方法。方法于2014年9月，选取山东省济南市某二氧化钛生产企业作为研究对象，进行定量监测和定性风险评估，使用冷凝颗粒计数器监测包装和气体粉碎车间颗粒物数浓度，运用3种分类控制工具，即CBnanotool、Stoffenmanager nano以及安全使用纳米材料和纳米产品指导（GWSNN）对这两个车间进行风险评估，比较3种风险评估的结果。结果与未工作时相比，包装和气体粉碎流程均能引起颗粒物数浓度明显升高，包装车间颗粒物数浓度从（3．52±1．46）×10^4／cm^3升高到（14．70±8．86）×10^4／cm^3，气体粉碎车间数浓度从（0．97±0．25）×10^4／cm^3升高到（1．26±0．35）×10^4／cm^3，差异均有统计学意义（均P〈0．05）；包装车间工作时和未工作时颗粒物数浓度均高于气体粉碎车间，差异均有统计学意义（均P〈0．05）。CBnanotool风险评估显示，包装车间的风险等级为高风险，气体粉碎车间为中风险；Stoffenmanager nano风险评估显示，二氧化钛包装车间为中风险，气体粉碎车间为低风险；GWSNN将包装车间判定为高风险，气体粉碎车间为低风险。结论3种分类控制工具的评估结果与监测结果基本一致，均在一定程度上适用于二氧化钛生产企业的职业健康风险评估。Objective To explore and validate suitable risk assessment methods for titanium dioxide though applying three risk assessment tools for nanomaterials based on the control banding （CB） approach. Methods A factory manufacturing titanium dioxide in Jinan city, Shandong province, was assessed using a quantitative exposure method and qualitative risk assessment methods in September, 2014. A condensation particle counter equipment was used to monitor the number concentration of particles at packaging workshop and jet milling workshop. We employed three control banding tools, including CB nanotool, Stoffenmanager nano and the Guidance on working safely with nanomaterials and nanoproducts （GWSNN） to evaluate the two workshops, then compared the evaluation results. Results The increases of particle concentrations were generated directly by packaging and jet milling processes, the number concentration from（3.52±1.46）×10^4/cm^3 to （14.70±8.86）×10^4/cm^3 at packaging workshop and from （0.97±0.25）×10^4/cm^3to （1.26±0.35）×10^4/cm^3 at milling workshop （both P〈0.05 ）. The number concentrations at packaging workshop were higher than those at jet milling workshop during both manufacturing and break times （both P〈0.05）. The results of CB nanotool showed that the risk level of the packaging workshop was classified as high and the risk level of the jet milling workshop was classified asmedium. The results of Stoffenmanager nano showed that the risk level of the packaging workshop was classified as medium and the risk level of the jet milling workshop was classified as low. The results of GWSNN showed that the risk level of packaging workshop was classified as high and the risk level of jet milling workshop was classified as low. Conclusion The results of evaluation based on the three control banding tools are related and aligned with the results of quantitative monitoring, so they are all suitable to perform occupational health risk assessment on industrial scale production of titanium dio

关 键 词：分类控制 二氧化钛 风险评估 职业卫生 

分 类 号：R131[医药卫生—劳动卫生]