Nanosafety practices: results from a national survey at research facilities

• Published in: Journal of nanoparticle research : an interdisciplinary forum for nanoscale science and technology Vol. 19; no. 5; p. 1
• Main Authors: Díaz-Soler, Beatriz María, López-Alonso, Mónica, Martínez-Aires, María Dolores
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Dordrecht Springer Netherlands 01.05.2017; Springer Nature B.V
• Subjects: Best practice; Characterization and Evaluation of Materials; Chemistry and Materials Science; Exposure; Fume cupboards; Hygiene; Inorganic Chemistry; Lasers; Materials Science; Nanomaterials; Nanoparticles; Nanotechnology; Occupational exposure; Optical Devices; Optics; Photonics; Physical Chemistry; Research facilities; Research Paper; Risk assessment; Safety; Engineered nanomaterials (ENMs); Occupational health and safety; Laboratory; Nanosafety practices; Nanotechnology; Spain
• ISSN: 1388-0764; 1572-896X
• DOI: 10.1007/s11051-017-3867-x

The exposure to engineered nanomaterials (ENMs) is a new emerging risk at work due to an increase in the number of workers potentially exposed to them and the current lack of data on their health and safety risks. This paper reports the findings of a survey designed to study the safety practices employed by workers in Spanish research facilities performing tasks involving the use of ENMs at research level. A questionnaire pretested and validated by an expert panel was sent by e-mail to the target audience. The 425 surveys completed show that most of the respondents handled up to 5 different ENMs, in suspension, in small amounts during short periods of exposure. The implementation of common hygienic practices, such as the use of protection for hands and the implementation of fume hoods, is widely indicated. The selection of the preventive and protective measures does not depend on the characteristics of ENMs handled. Also, the risks posed by ENMs are widely ignored. Besides the performance of risk assessment, hygienic monitoring and the conducting of a specific health surveillance are practically non-existent although some accidents relating to ENMs were identified. In conclusion, workers’ exposure to ENMs seems to be low. Even though the best practices and preventive and protective measures reported were employed, most of the respondents could not be correctly protected. Moreover, workers do not associate the measures implemented with the nanorisks. Finally, there is a lack of proactive action underway to protect the workers, and concerns about safety are weakly evidenced.