Health Risk Assessment on the Glyphosate Exposure of Knapsack Sprayers.

Authors

  • Kodchakorn Uengchuen1, Sunisa Chaiklieng2

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.37506/ijphrd.v11i3.2403

Keywords:

Glyphosate, Health risk assessment, PPE, Sprayer

Abstract

Context: Herbicide poisoning has been increasing among agriculturists in the northeast of Thailand. The
aim of this cross-sectional study was to assess the health risk of glyphosate exposure among knapsack
sprayers. A health risk assessment matrix was applied to 243 sprayers by considering the extent of glyphosate
exposure per year according to the actual amount of glyphosate (48 %w/v) dispensed and frequency of
exposure. In addition, use of personal protective equipment (PPE) was taken into account. The second
component of the risk matrix was the severity of the recorded adverse effects in the same group. The results
revealed that 76.95% of sprayers were slightly exposed (100 to 499 milliliters of glyphosate used per year)
and 57.20% wore at least four types of protection, comprised from any of the following types: gloves, mask,
boots, trousers, long-sleeved shirt, and others. A majority had a slight likelihood of glyphosate exposure
(69.14%) and a minority experienced a mild level of adverse symptoms (17.28%), including rash, dizziness
and headache. Some sprayers (36.20%) had a health risk of glyphosate exposure higher than an acceptable
level, which might explain the adverse health effects of long-term exposure. This health risk assessment tool
combined with PPE usage of a herbicide applicator would be useful for the health surveillance program.

Author Biography

  • Kodchakorn Uengchuen1, Sunisa Chaiklieng2

    1Master’s degree student on the M.Sc. program in Occupational Health and Safety, 2Department of Environmental
    Health Occupational Health and Safety, Faculty of Public Health, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand

Downloads

Published

2020-03-26

How to Cite

Health Risk Assessment on the Glyphosate Exposure of Knapsack Sprayers. (2020). Indian Journal of Public Health Research & Development, 11(3), 2077-2082. https://doi.org/10.37506/ijphrd.v11i3.2403