English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Although urinary 1,6-hexamethylene diamine (HDA) is a useful biomarker of exposure to 1,6-hexamethylene diisocyanate (HDI), a large degree of unexplained intra- and inter-individual variability exists between estimated HDI exposure and urine HDA levels. We investigated the effect of individual and workplace factors on urine HDA levels using quantitative dermal and inhalation exposure data derived from a survey of automotive spray painters exposed to HDI. Painters' dermal and breathing-zone HDI-exposures were monitored over an entire workday for up to three separate workdays, spaced approximately one month apart. One urine sample was collected before the start of work with HDI-containing paints, and multiple samples were collected throughout the workday. Using mixed effects multiple linear regression modeling, coverall use resulted in significantly lower HDA levels (p = 0.12), and weekday contributed to significant variability in HDA levels (p = 0.056). We also investigated differences in urine HDA levels stratified by dichotomous and classification covariates using analysis of variance. Use of coveralls (p = 0.05), respirator type worn (p = 0.06), smoker status (p = 0.12), paint-booth type (p = 0.02), and more than one painter at the shop (p = 0.10) were all found to significantly affect urine HDA levels adjusted for creatinine concentration. Coverall use remained significant (p = 0.10), even after adjusting for respirator type. These results indicate that the variation in urine HDA level is mainly due to workplace factors and that appropriate dermal and inhalation protection is required to prevent HDI exposure.

Factors affecting variability in the urinary biomarker 1,6-hexamethylene diamine in workers exposed to 1,6-hexamethylene diisocyanate