3. Cleaning tasks generate airborne exposures
Volatile compounds identified in cleaning products covered
a wide range of volatilities, from highly volatile
ingredients such as ammonia (BP = -33°C) and isopropyl
alcohol (BP = 82°C) and relatively less volatile ingredients
such as 2-butoxyethanol (BP = 168°C) and
mono-ethanolamine (BP = 171°C). The highest intensity
of VOC exposures in the workplace is expected during
the use of floor strippers and general purpose
cleaners because they contain the highest concentrations
of VOCs in the bulk. Inhalation exposure to aerosol particles
of volatile and non-volatile ingredients can be
facilitated during product spraying. The worst exposure
scenarios can happen when several cleaning tasks are
performed in small and poorly ventilated spaces, such as
bathrooms.
Hazardous exposures related to cleaning products are an
important public health concern because these exposures
impact not only cleaning workers, but also other occupants
in the building. Data from laboratory studies indicate
a two phase decay of the air concentrations in the
room. The first phase decay happens very fast (in the first
10 minutes) and the second phase decay happens slowly
(about 1–2 hours for the air concentrations to reach the
background level). Furthermore, experimental studies
have shown that some compounds such as glycol ethers
are released slowly from the surfaces. This creates potential
for exposure of other occupants in the building, hours
after the cleaning activities are performed [35,36]. The
intensity of exposures after the completion of cleaning has
not been investigated in field studies. In a follow up study
we will conduct quantitative assessment airborne exposures
during cleaning and will provide evidence on the
exposure levels after cleaning.
4. Cleaning tasks create potential for dermal exposures
Application of the DREAM method in this pilot study confirmed
the applicability of this method for categorization
of cleaning tasks in different dermal exposure categories.
Exposure categories identified included two groups:
"high" (for sink, mirror and toilet bowl cleaning) and
"moderate" (for floor cleaning with two different methods)
exposures. The difference between these two groups
of tasks may reflect the product applications procedures,
such as spraying (typical for the first group of tasks) versus
mopping (the second group of tasks). The DREAM
method did not find differences within tasks that involve
spraying and within the tasks that do not employ spraying.
Both floor cleaning methods were in the same exposure
category, even though there were important changes
in the cleaning procedures (such as dipping the hands
into cleaning solution during the microfiber mop
method). This limitation has also been observed by the
DREAM authors, who recommend the method is most
appropriate for detecting high contrast exposure levels[
23]. Furthermore, for all cleaning tasks, DREAM identified
hands as the body part at higher potential for
dermal exposure compared to other body parts. Overall,
our results suggest that dermal exposure prevention
should focus mostly on hands and the activities that
involve product spraying.
The DREAM observational analyses applied here showed
that dermal exposure can be an important route for chemicals
in the body. Recent literature suggests that some
chemical ingredients, such as isocyanates, may be able to
penetrate the skin and cause systemic respiratory effects
[45]. Dermal exposure should be evaluated in future studies
of health effects of cleaning.