Biomonitoring of occupational exposure to bisphenol A, bisphenol S and bisphenol F: A systematic review.
Level 3 - non-randomized controlled study
Systematic review of observational occupational biomonitoring studies
PubMed 33865140 · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.146905
What was done
A systematic review following PRISMA methodology was conducted across PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science for articles published between 2000 and March 27, 2020. The authors identified and synthesized human biomonitoring (HBM) studies evaluating occupational exposure to bisphenol A (BPA), bisphenol S (BPS), and bisphenol F (BPF).
What was found
A total of 30 studies on BPA, 4 on BPS, and 2 on BPF met inclusion criteria. Fifty-seven percent (57%) of BPA studies took place in Asia, whereas 50% of BPS and BPF studies were conducted in Europe. BPA studies in European plastic and epoxy resin sectors were infrequent; Asian data indicated higher exposure when BPA was used as a raw material. Main BPS exposure data came from cashiers, and BPF data came from incinerator workers. Numerical biomarker levels were not reported in the abstract.
Why it matters
As industrial production shifts from BPA to analogues like BPS and BPF, understanding workplace exposure levels is critical for establishing targeted occupational safety standards and risk management measures.
Limits
Data on BPA substitutes are extremely sparse, with only six studies total for BPS and BPF. Marked heterogeneity in study designs prevented direct comparisons across cohorts, and data on industrial bisphenol applications outside of Asia are minimal. Quantitative exposure concentrations were not provided in the abstract.
Cited by
- context Studies show that retail checkout workers who handle receipts, particularly pregnant checkout workers, have some of the highest measured levels of bisphenol A (BPA).