Advertisement

Safety and Containment of Microbial Bioaerosols

  • Barbara Johnson
  • I. Gary Resnick

Abstract

Guidelines for the safe use of pathogens in various laboratory and industrial settings have evolved to provide an acceptable level of protection for the laboratory worker, the public, and the environment. Considerable data exist to support the efficacy of these guidelines. However, there is little established regulatory criteria on which to base a biosafety program. In addition, the guidelines are primarily concerned with clinical laboratory settings as is the majority of the historical safety data. Therefore, these guidelines must be interpreted by a biosafety professional to ensure that the inherent level of risk, less mitigative measures, is understood by management. Management, in consultation with workers and government regulators, in turn decides whether the risk is acceptable. This is often an iterative process for novel laboratory operations such as aerosol studies with pathogens or toxins.

Keywords

Personal Protective Equipment Primary Barrier Biosafety Level Infectious Material Biological Safety Cabinet 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. ANSI Z88, 1989, subcommittee on respiratory protection against infectious aerosols.Google Scholar
  2. Brown, V. K. H., V. L. Box, and J. J. Simpson. 1975. Decontamination procedures for skin exposed to phenolic substances. Arch. Environ. Health, 30: 1–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Chatigny, M. A. 1986. pp. 144–172, Primary barriers, in B. M. Miller, (ed.), Laboratory Safety: Principles and Practices, American Society for Microbiology, Washington D.C.Google Scholar
  4. Conning, D. M. and M. J. Hayes. 1970. The dermal toxicity of phenol: an investigation of the most effective first-aid measures. Br. J. Ind. Med., 27: 155–159.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Duke-Elder, S. and P. A. MacFaul. 1972. Injuries. Non-mechanical injuries, pp. 912–933. In S. Duke-Elder (ed.), System of Opthamology, vol 14, part 2., C. V. Mosby.Google Scholar
  6. Glaser, Z. R. Special occupational hazard review with control recommendation for the use of ethylene oxide as a sterilant in medical facilities. Department of Health and Human Services publication no. 77–200. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  7. Hanel, E. Jr. and M. M. Halbert. 1986. Pipeting, pp 204–214. In B. M. Miller (ed.), Laboratory Safety: Principals and Practices, American Society for Microbiology, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  8. Hatch, T. F. 1961. Distribution and deposition of inhaled particles in respiratory tract. Bacteriol. Rev., 25: 237–240.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Johnson, B., B. G. Harper, A. J. Mohr, D. R. Winters, and I. G. Resnick. 1993. Potential use of vaporized hydrogen peroxide in the inactivation of toxins., Abstr. Annual American Society for Microbiology, 93 General Meeting, Atlanta, Ga., Q263, 1993.Google Scholar
  10. Johnson, B., D. D. Martin, W. S. Huff, and I. G. Resnick. 1992. Efficacy of selected respiratory protective devices (RPD) challenged with bacteria, Abstr. 35th Annual American Biological Safety Association Conference, 1992.Google Scholar
  11. Klapes, N. A. and D. Vesley. 1990. Vapor-phase hydrogen peroxide as a surface decontaminant and sterilant. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 56: 503–506.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Kuehne, R. W. 1973. Biological containment facility for studying infectious disease. Appl. Microbiol., 26: 239–243.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Lauer, J. L., D. R. Battles, and D. Vesley. 1982. Decontaminating infectious laboratory waste by autoclaving. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 44: 690–694.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Lynch, P. 1982. Matching protective clothing to job hazards. Occupat. Health Safety, Jan: 30–34.Google Scholar
  15. National Institutes of Health, Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals, DHHS publication no. (NIH) 86–23 (revised 1985 ), U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  16. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. 1976. Criteria for a recommended standard-occupational exposure to formaldehyde., Department of Health and Human Services publication no. 76–142., U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington D.C.Google Scholar
  17. National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health. 1992. Recommended guidelines for personal respiratory protection of workers in health care facilities potentially exposed to tuberculosis. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control, NIOSH, DHHS ( NIOSH ), Atlanta, Ga.Google Scholar
  18. National Research Council, 1990, Biosafety in the Laboratory, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., pp. 25–28.Google Scholar
  19. National Sanitation Foundation, NSF Standard No. 49 for biohazard cabinetry, 1976 (revised June 1987 ), NSF, Ann Arbor, Mich.Google Scholar
  20. Richardson, J. H. and W. E. Barkley, W. E. (ed.). 1988. Biosafety in Microbiological and Biomedical Laboratories. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and National Institutes of Health, HHS Publication no. (CDC)88–8395, 2nd Ed.Google Scholar
  21. Rickloff, J. A. 1990. Use of vaporized hydrogen peroxide for the biodecontamination of enclosed areas., Abstr. Interphex USA Conference, New York, N.Y., 1990.Google Scholar
  22. Shumunes, E. and E. J. Levy. 1972. Quartenary ammonium compound contact dermatitis from a deodorant. Arch. Dermatol. 105: 91–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Thomas, S. M. G. 1970. The use of protective gloves. Occupat. Health, 22: 281–284.Google Scholar
  24. U.S. Code of Federal Regulation 9, Subchapter A, Parts 1–3, Laboratory Animal Welfare Regulations, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  25. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 29, OSHA, Part 1910, Occupational Health and Safety Administration Safety and Health Standards.Google Scholar
  26. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 29, OSHA, Part 1910.1030, Occupational Exposure to Bloodborne Pathogens.Google Scholar
  27. U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 32, Department of the Army, DOD, Parts 626–627, Biological Defense Safety Program.Google Scholar
  28. Vesley, D. and J. Lauer. 1986. Decontamination, sterilization, disinfection and antisepsis in the microbiology laboratory. p. 182–198. In: B. M. Miller (ed.), Laboratory Safety: Principles and Practices, American Society for Microbiology, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Chapman & Hall, Inc. 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Barbara Johnson
  • I. Gary Resnick

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations