Experts Weigh Options for Health Surveillance in Nanotech Workers

Newswise — Does exposure to nanoparticles pose a health threat to workers? Pending further research to clarify the risks, nanotechnology companies need to consider what steps they will take to protect the health of employees exposed to engineered nanoparticles, according to a study in the May Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, official publication of the American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine (ACOEM). In the absence of information on specific health effects, "[I]t is difficult to identify an appropriate evidence-based occupational health surveillance strategy for workers handling nanomaterials," according to lead author Paul A. Schulte, Ph.D., of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health and colleagues.

As the number of workers exposed to nanoparticles continues to increase, there is "growing, but not definitive" evidence of potential health hazards. However, these data come mainly from experimental studies in animals; there have been no published studies of health effects in groups of workers exposed to nanoparticles. Dr. Schulte and colleagues write, "Companies currently involved with nanotechnology are faced with the dilemma of balancing a desire to expand a potentially bountiful technology with limited knowledge about the potential hazards."

Given the lack of data, the authors suggest a range of possible health surveillance approaches. Depending on the circumstances, no targeted action beyond basic medical and hazard surveillance may be needed. In some settings, it may be appropriate to document the characteristics and handling of nanoparticles and to identify potentially exposed workers. Recording this information in a database would provide a basis for action in case new health hazards came to light.

The next step would be to establish some form of medical monitoring, including either general health monitoring or some form of targeted medical testing—for example, focusing on changes in lung function. However, in the absence of data on potential health effects, the value of medical monitoring is questionable as the occupational medicine physicians performing the examinations would not know if a specific abnormality is linked to exposure to nanoparticles.

The authors highlight the need for more research to guide health surveillance approaches in the nanotechnology industry. Basic science studies may be able to identify certain types of nanoparticles with higher or lower toxic potential, while follow-up studies of exposed workers might help to identify emerging health conditions.

Meanwhile, establishing some type of exposure and employee tracking registry might be of value, Dr. Schulte and colleagues suggest. This would provide a structured approach to identifying and maintaining communication with workers exposed to nanoparticles—especially if future health problems come to light. The authors conclude, "In the face of uncertainty about the hazards of nanoparticles, a corporate or societal response"¦may assure the public that appropriate efforts are being taken to identify and control exposures in a timely and responsible manner."

About ACOEMACOEM (http://www.acoem.org), an international society of 5,000 occupational physicians and other health care professionals, provides leadership to promote optimal health and safety of workers, workplaces, and environments.

About Journal of Occupational and Environmental MedicineThe Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine (http://www.joem.org) is the official journal of the American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine. Edited to serve as a guide for physicians, nurses, and researchers, the clinically oriented research articles are an excellent source for new ideas, concepts, techniques, and procedures that can be readily applied in the industrial or commercial employment setting.