Comparison and Evaluation of Multiple Users' Usage of the Exposure and Risk Tool: Stoffenmanager 5.1.
(2015) In Annals of Occupational Hygiene 59(7). p.821-835- Abstract
- 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... (More)
- 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. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/5345035
- author
- Landberg, Hanna LU ; Berg, Peter ; Andersson, Lennart ; Bergendorf, Ulf LU ; Karlsson, Jan-Eric LU ; Westberg, Håkan and Tinnerberg, Håkan LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2015
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- in
- Annals of Occupational Hygiene
- volume
- 59
- issue
- 7
- pages
- 821 - 835
- publisher
- Oxford University Press
- external identifiers
-
- pmid:25858432
- wos:000361490900001
- scopus:84939610655
- pmid:25858432
- ISSN
- 1475-3162
- DOI
- 10.1093/annhyg/mev027
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 8c82ccfc-1c2f-4e44-8cf2-6edc28cd3c01 (old id 5345035)
- alternative location
- http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25858432?dopt=Abstract
- date added to LUP
- 2016-04-01 10:04:23
- date last changed
- 2022-04-04 02:01:17
@article{8c82ccfc-1c2f-4e44-8cf2-6edc28cd3c01,
abstract = {{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.}},
author = {{Landberg, Hanna and Berg, Peter and Andersson, Lennart and Bergendorf, Ulf and Karlsson, Jan-Eric and Westberg, Håkan and Tinnerberg, Håkan}},
issn = {{1475-3162}},
language = {{eng}},
number = {{7}},
pages = {{821--835}},
publisher = {{Oxford University Press}},
series = {{Annals of Occupational Hygiene}},
title = {{Comparison and Evaluation of Multiple Users' Usage of the Exposure and Risk Tool: Stoffenmanager 5.1.}},
url = {{https://lup.lub.lu.se/search/files/1532055/8410264.pdf}},
doi = {{10.1093/annhyg/mev027}},
volume = {{59}},
year = {{2015}},
}