Feasibility Study: Silicone Wristbands for Measuring Pesticides and Flame-Retardants in Farming Older Men
Listed in
This article is not in any list yet, why not save it to one of your lists.Abstract
Background
Silicone wristbands can detect exposure to multiple chemicals. In the last decade, health studies have used them to assess environmental exposures, but few have included aging men, particularly those actively working with pesticides.
Objective
To explore the feasibility, acceptability, and/or receptiveness of older adults to wear a wristband for multiple days while collecting other biomarkers (serum and urine). Additionally, we aimed to assess exposure differences among actively farming pesticide applicators versus non-farming older adults and examine correlations between pesticides and organophosphate ester flame retardants [OPEFR] detected in the wristbands with target serum/urine metabolites.
Methods
Fifteen males age 70-plus in North Carolina; 10 farmers, pesticide applicators and 5 non-farmers with no reported pesticide use. Participants wore wristbands for 5 consecutive days 24/hours a day, provided a serum sample on day one and end-of-day urine samples on days 1, 3, and 5. Six pesticides and four OPEFR were measured in wristbands.
Results
All participants were receptive to wristbands and wore them for the required time, were compliant in study procedures, and did not report any adverse reactions to the wristbands. In wristbands, atrazine (Geometric means (GM) of specific gravity-corrected levels=14.5 ng/g) and malathion (GM=21.8 ng/g) were detected only in farmers. wristbands GMs were higher in farmers than non-farmers for chlorpyrifos GM difference=408.8 ng/g, and trans-permethrin GM difference=569.2 ng/g. However, wristbands DDT GM was 1.8 ng/g higher in non-farmers than farmers. OPEFRs TCEP and TDCIPP GMs were higher among farmers while TCIPP and TPHP were higher among non-farmers. wristbands pesticide levels and urinary metabolite correlations were weak-to-moderate. A moderate correlation was observed between DDE in wristbands and DDE in serum (r s =.44; p =0.20).
Conclusion
Despite the short test time, wristbands detected multiple chemical exposures regardless of farming status. More research is required to understand the utility of wristbands in assessing pesticide exposures in older populations.
Impact Statement
Silicone wristbands are inexpensive, easy to wear passive sampling devices able to capture multiple chemicals providing a snapshot of environmental exposures. Recent research supports wristbands as promising tools to capture flame retardant exposures, but more studies are needed to determine the efficacy of the wristbands for pesticide exposures in older occupational cohorts.
