The browser you are using is not supported by this website. All versions of Internet Explorer are no longer supported, either by us or Microsoft (read more here: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/microsoft-365/windows/end-of-ie-support).

Please use a modern browser to fully experience our website, such as the newest versions of Edge, Chrome, Firefox or Safari etc.

Comparison and Evaluation of Multiple Users' Usage of the Exposure and Risk Tool: Stoffenmanager 5.1.

På svenska

Author

  • Hanna Landberg
  • Peter Berg
  • Lennart Andersson
  • Ulf Bergendorf
  • Jan-Eric Karlsson
  • Håkan Westberg
  • Håkan Tinnerberg

Summary, in English

Stoffenmanager is an exposure and risk assessment tool that has a control banding part, with risk bands as outcome and a quantitative exposure assessment part, with the 90th percentile of the predicted exposure as a default outcome. The main aim of the study was to investigate whether multiple users of Stoffenmanager came to the same result when modelling the same scenarios. Other aims were to investigate the differences between outcomes of the control banding part with the measured risk quota and to evaluate the conservatism of the tool by testing whether the 90th percentiles are above the measured median exposures. We investigated airborne exposures at companies in four different types of industry: wood, printing, metal foundry, and spray painting. Three scenarios were modelled and measured, when possible, at each company. When modelled, 13 users visited each company on the same occasion creating individual assessments. Consensus assessments were also modelled for each scenario by six occupational hygienists. The multiple users' outcomes were often spread over two risk bands in the control banding part, and the differences in the quantitative exposure outcomes for the highest and lowest assessments per scenario varied between a factor 2 and 100. Four parameters were difficult for the users to assess and had a large impact on the outcome: type of task, breathing zone, personal protection, and control measures. Only two scenarios had a higher measured risk quota than predicted by the control banding part, also two scenarios had slightly higher measured median exposure value than modelled consensus in the quantitative exposure assessment part. Hence, the variability between users was large but the model performed well.

Publishing year

2015

Language

English

Pages

821-835

Publication/Series

Annals of Occupational Hygiene

Volume

59

Issue

7

Document type

Journal article

Publisher

Oxford University Press

Topic

  • Environmental Health and Occupational Health

Status

Published

ISBN/ISSN/Other

  • ISSN: 1475-3162