RESUMO
The hypothesis being tested was that the exposure of female workers to the electromagnetic field (EMF) emitted by an induction hob (IHb) meeting public exposure limitations (evaluated according to EN/IEC 62233) is also compliant with European Directive 2013/35/EU on workers' protection. The electric field induced in three female models in a realistic ergonomically comfortable posture near IHb was evaluated using numerical models of 25 kHz EMF sources (IHb covered by cooking vessels). It was found that, in analyzed ergonomically comfortable exposure situations, the electric field induced in the user's body may exceed public and workers' limits when the vessels do not match the dimensions of IHb's heating zone. This can even be the case when IHb complies with Conformité Européenne labeling requirements (i.e. EMF exposure falls below public limits 30 cm away from IHb edge). In the 36 exposure scenarios analyzed, statistically significant differences were found when the distances from IHb and vessel dimension, and the height and body mass index of models in exposure scenarios varied, but not between the use of models of pregnant and nonpregnant women. The use of IHb complying with European requirements on general public protection does not ensure that EMF exposure to workers complies with the relevant limits. Adequate protection measures need to address these occupational environmental hazards. © 2020 Bioelectromagnetics Society.
Assuntos
Campos Eletromagnéticos/efeitos adversos , Ergonomia , Campos Magnéticos , Exposição Ocupacional/análise , Exposição à Radiação/análise , Som/efeitos adversos , Feminino , Humanos , Modelos Biológicos , Exposição Ocupacional/efeitos adversos , Postura , Exposição à Radiação/efeitos adversosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Low frequency magnetic field, inducing electrical field (Ein) inside conductive structures may directly affect the human body, e.g., by electrostimulation in the nervous system. In addition, the spatial distribution and level of Ein are disturbed in tissues neighbouring the medical implant. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Numerical models of magneto-therapeutic applicator (emitting sinusoidal magnetic field of frequency 100 Hz) and the user of hearing implant (based on bone conduction: Bonebridge type - IS-BB or BAHA (bone anchorde hearing aid) type - IS-BAHA) were worked out. Values of Ein were analyzed in the model of the implant user's head, e.g., physiotherapist, placed next to the applicator. RESULTS: It was demonstrated that the use of IS-BB or IS-BAHA makes electromagnetic hazards significantly higher (up to 4-fold) compared to the person without implant exposed to magnetic field heterogeneous in space. Hazards for IS-BAHA users are higher than those for IS-BB users. It was found that applying the principles of directive 2013/35/EU, at exposure to magnetic field below exposure limits the direct biophysical effects of exposure in hearing prosthesis users may exceed relevant limits. Whereas applying principles and limits set up by Polish labor law or the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) guidelines, the compliance with the exposure limits also ensures the compliance with relevant limits of electric field induced in the body of hearing implant user. CONCLUSIONS: It is necessary to assess individually electromagnetic hazard concerning hearing implant users bearing in mind significantly higher hazards to them compared to person without implant or differences between levels of hazards faced by users of implants of various structural or technological solutions. Med Pr 2017;68(4):469-477.