Insecticide Filtration Efficiency of Respiratory Protective Equipment Commonly Worn by Farmers in Thailand

Ratana Sapbamrer, Surat Hongsibsong, Manoch Naksata and Wimol Naksata
Additional contact information
Ratana Sapbamrer: Department of Community Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, 110 Inthavaroros Road, Sri Phum Subdistrict, Muang District, Chiang Mai 50200, Thailand
Surat Hongsibsong: Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences and Non Communicable Diseases Center of Excellence, Chiang Mai University, 110 Inthavaroros Road, Sriphum Subdistrict, Muang District, Chiang Mai 50200, Thailand
Manoch Naksata: Department of Physics and Material Science, Faculty of Science, Chiang Mai University, 239, Huay Kaew Road, Suthep Subdistrict, Muang District, Chiang Mai 50200, Thailand
Wimol Naksata: Department of Physics and Material Science, Faculty of Science, Chiang Mai University, 239, Huay Kaew Road, Suthep Subdistrict, Muang District, Chiang Mai 50200, Thailand

IJERPH, 2021, vol. 18, issue 5, 1-15

Abstract: Farmers are at a high risk of inhalation exposure when handling pesticides. Thai farmers usually protect themselves against pesticide exposure by wearing commercial respiratory protective equipment (RPE) available from rural community markets. However, scientific data regarding the pesticide filtration efficiency of RPE commonly worn by farmers is limited. Thus, this study aimed to investigate the efficiency of insecticide filtration of various RPE commonly worn by farmers in Thailand. The half facepiece respirator was used as a control to compare the results with other RPE. Ten types of RPE were selected for testing. The filtration efficiency of each RPE against insecticides was tested in a laboratory. The remarkable findings were that a surgical mask demonstrated the least filtration efficiency of all tested insecticides, with a range of 25.7–61.5%. The RPE available in rural markets of Thailand had a filtration efficiency within a range of 64.9–95.4%, whereas a half facepiece respirator was the most efficient in filtering insecticides, with a range of 96.5–98.9%. Therefore, our results suggest that the RPE most frequently worn by farmers may not provide adequate protection when compared with the respirator. However, considerations around RPE use in low-and middle-income countries and tropical climate conditions should be based on pesticide toxicity and practical use, ensuring balance between the risks from pesticide exposure and acceptance of PPE use.

Keywords: pesticide; insecticide; respiratory protective equipment; mask; farmer; occupational exposure; inhalation (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: I I1 I3 Q Q5 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/5/2624/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/18/5/2624/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:18:y:2021:i:5:p:2624-:d:511441

Access Statistics for this article

IJERPH is currently edited by Ms. Jenna Liu

More articles in IJERPH from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().