Comparing formaldehyde risk assessment in histopathology laboratory staff using three methods based on US EPA approaches in the west of Iran.

Objective. In different studies, various models have been used for exposure risk assessment of formaldehyde, so this study was conducted to compare existing methods. Method. This cross-sectional analytical study was performed in the pathology section of four hospitals in the west of Iran in 2016. Personal air sampling was performed using National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) method 3500. Risk assessment with existing methods and comparison between them was performed with the statistical tests. Results. 71% of participants were exposed to values above the threshold limit value. The carcinogenic risk obtained for the staff of the studied hospitals ranged from 3 × 10-6 to 3.07 × 10-4. The potential dose of exposure to formaldehyde varied from 73.22 to 3216.06 µg · day-1. The hazard quotient value was more than 1 in 71.4% of cases. Conclusion. The results of the existing methods for carcinogenic risk assessment are almost similar. In general, the Risk Assessment Information System (RAIS) is recommended because of its simplicity and reduction of error probability, saving time and cost. The results of this study can be used as a guide to select the appropriate risk assessment method for planning, providing appropriate control measures and risk management.