论文部分内容阅读
目的通过比较不同的采样和测定方法,探讨作业场所空气中铬及其化合物在低浓度甚至未检出的情况下出现电镀作业工人鼻科检查异常是否由于检测方法引起。方法选择6家电镀企业的6个镀铬作业点,分别按不同采样、检验方法进行采样、测定。结果个体采样的检出率(46.15%)高于短时间采样第2法(8.33%),差异有统计学意义(校准P=0.0037,P<0.05);短时间采样第1法检出率为0,短时间采样第2法检出率为8.33%,不满足统计要求。结论工作场所空气中铬及其化合物采样和测定方法在极低检测浓度下,不能推断短时间采样哪种方法更可靠,应优先选择个体采样和长时间采样为主。
Objective By comparing different sampling and determination methods, to explore the chromium and its compounds in the workplace air at low concentrations or even not detected in the case of electroplating workers nasal examination abnormalities caused by the detection method. Methods Six chrome plating sites of six electroplating enterprises were selected and sampled and measured according to different sampling and testing methods respectively. Results The detection rate of individual sampling (46.15%) was higher than that of short sampling method (8.33%) (P = 0.0037, P <0.05) 0, short-time sampling The second method was 8.33%, does not meet the statistical requirements. Conclusion The method of sampling and determination of chromium and its compounds in workplace air can not be extrapolated to a more reliable method at very low detection concentrations. Individual sampling and long-term sampling should be preferred.