Optimization of a DNSH passive sampling method to measure airborne carbonyls

Various airborne aldehydes and ketones (i.e., airborne carbonyls) present in outdoor, indoor, and personal air pose a risk to human health at present environmental concentrations. To date, there is no adequate, simple-to-use sampler for monitoring carbonyls at parts per billion concentrations in personal air. The Passive Aldehydes and Ketones Sampler (PAKS) originally developed for this purpose has been found to be unreliable in a number of relatively recent field studies. The PAKS method uses dansylhydrazine, DNSH, as the derivatization agent to produce aldehyde derivatives that are analyzed by HPLC with fluorescence detection. The reasons for the poor performance of the PAKS are not known but it is hypothesized that the chemical derivatization conditions and reaction kinetics combined with a relatively low sampling rate may play a role. This study evaluated the effect of absorption and emission wavelengths, pH of the DNSH coating solution, extraction solvent, and time post-extraction for the yield and stability of formaldehyde, acetaldehyde, and acrolein DNSH derivatives. The results suggest that the optimum conditions for the analysis of DNSHydrazones are the following. The excitation and emission wavelengths for HPLC analysis should be at 250nm and 500nm, respectively. The optimal pH of the coating solution appears to be pH 2 because it improves the formation of di-derivatized acrolein DNSHydrazones without affecting the response of the derivatives of the formaldehyde and acetaldehyde derivatives. Acetonitrile is the preferable extraction solvent while the optimal time to analyze the aldehyde derivatives is 72 hours post-extraction. ^

Evaluation of a solid phase microextraction method for community-based monitoring of 1,3-butadiene and benzene in Houston, Texas

The Houston region is home to arguably the largest petrochemical and refining complex anywhere. The effluent of this complex includes many potentially hazardous compounds. Study of some of these compounds has led to recognition that a number of known and probable carcinogens are at elevated levels in ambient air. Two of these, benzene and 1,3-butadiene, have been found in concentrations which may pose health risk for residents of Houston.^ Recent popular journalism and publications by local research institutions has increased the interest of the public in Houston's air quality. Much of the literature has been critical of local regulatory agencies' oversight of industrial pollution. A number of citizens in the region have begun to volunteer with air quality advocacy groups in the testing of community air. Inexpensive methods exist for monitoring of ozone, particulate matter and airborne toxic ambient concentrations. This study is an evaluation of a technique that has been successfully applied to airborne toxics.^ This technique, solid phase microextraction (SPME), has been used to measure airborne volatile organic hydrocarbons at community-level concentrations. It is has yielded accurate and rapid concentration estimates at a relatively low cost per sample. Examples of its application to measurement of airborne benzene exist in the literature. None have been found for airborne 1,3-butadiene. These compounds were selected for an evaluation of SPME as a community-deployed technique, to replicate previous application to benzene, to expand application to 1,3-butadiene and due to the salience of these compounds in this community. ^ This study demonstrates that SPME is a useful technique for quantification of 1,3-butadiene at concentrations observed in Houston. Laboratory background levels precluded recommendation of the technique for benzene. One type of SPME fiber, 85 μm Carboxen/PDMS, was found to be a sensitive sampling device for 1,3-butadiene under temperature and humidity conditions common in Houston. This study indicates that these variables affect instrument response. This suggests the necessity of calibration within specific conditions of these variables. While deployment of this technique was less expensive than other methods of quantification of 1,3-butadiene, the complexity of calibration may exclude an SPME method from broad deployment by community groups.^

Estimates of hospital and physician costs of epilepsy in the United States for 1995 comparing the provider -based survey method and a patient -based medical charts and billing method

This investigation compares two different methodologies for calculating the national cost of epilepsy: provider-based survey method (PBSM) and the patient-based medical charts and billing method (PBMC&BM). The PBSM uses the National Hospital Discharge Survey (NHDS), the National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NHAMCS) and the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey (NAMCS) as the sources of utilization. The PBMC&BM uses patient data, charts and billings, to determine utilization rates for specific components of hospital, physician and drug prescriptions. ^ The 1995 hospital and physician cost of epilepsy is estimated to be $722 million using the PBSM and $1,058 million using the PBMC&BM. The difference of $336 million results from $136 million difference in utilization and $200 million difference in unit cost. ^ Utilization. The utilization difference of $136 million is composed of an inpatient variation of $129 million, $100 million hospital and $29 million physician, and an ambulatory variation of $7 million. The $100 million hospital variance is attributed to inclusion of febrile seizures in the PBSM, $−79 million, and the exclusion of admissions attributed to epilepsy, $179 million. The former suggests that the diagnostic codes used in the NHDS may not properly match the current definition of epilepsy as used in the PBMC&BM. The latter suggests NHDS errors in the attribution of an admission to the principal diagnosis. ^ The $29 million variance in inpatient physician utilization is the result of different per-day-of-care physician visit rates, 1.3 for the PBMC&BM versus 1.0 for the PBSM. The absence of visit frequency measures in the NHDS affects the internal validity of the PBSM estimate and requires the investigator to make conservative assumptions. ^ The remaining ambulatory resource utilization variance is $7 million. Of this amount, $22 million is the result of an underestimate of ancillaries in the NHAMCS and NAMCS extrapolations using the patient visit weight. ^ Unit cost. The resource cost variation is $200 million, inpatient is $22 million and ambulatory is $178 million. The inpatient variation of $22 million is composed of $19 million in hospital per day rates, due to a higher cost per day in the PBMC&BM, and $3 million in physician visit rates, due to a higher cost per visit in the PBMC&BM. ^ The ambulatory cost variance is $178 million, composed of higher per-physician-visit costs of $97 million and higher per-ancillary costs of $81 million. Both are attributed to the PBMC&BM's precise identification of resource utilization that permits accurate valuation. ^ Conclusion. Both methods have specific limitations. The PBSM strengths are its sample designs that lead to nationally representative estimates and permit statistical point and confidence interval estimation for the nation for certain variables under investigation. However, the findings of this investigation suggest the internal validity of the estimates derived is questionable and important additional information required to precisely estimate the cost of an illness is absent. ^ The PBMC&BM is a superior method in identifying resources utilized in the physician encounter with the patient permitting more accurate valuation. However, the PBMC&BM does not have the statistical reliability of the PBSM; it relies on synthesized national prevalence estimates to extrapolate a national cost estimate. While precision is important, the ability to generalize to the nation may be limited due to the small number of patients that are followed. ^