methamphetamine residuemethamphetamine … residuemethamphetamine residue transfer efficiencies from...

Methamphetamine ResidueMethamphetamine ResidueMethamphetamine Residue Methamphetamine Residue Transfer Efficiencies from Transfer Efficiencies from

Household SurfacesHousehold Surfaces

Kate Serrano, MPHSerranoK@NJHealth orgSerranoK@NJHealth orgSerranoK@NJHealth.orgSerranoK@NJHealth.org

(303)270(303)270--27912791

RT 225: Methamphetamine Labs: Current Issues RT 225: Methamphetamine Labs: Current Issues AIHce 2012AIHce 2012

Indianapolis, INIndianapolis, INJune 20, 2012June 20, 2012

http://activerain.com/image_store/uploads/7/1/3/6/2/ar129641192026317.jpg

2

Introduction

• Methamphetamine SymptomsSymptoms

• Methamphetamine ContaminationContamination

• Laboratory Studies– Characterization of panel

surfaces– Characterization of hand

surface areasurface area– Dermal sampling– Dermal transfer analysis

Photo by: USGS

– Exposure analysis• Conclusions

3

Methamphetamine Symptoms• Little known regarding chronic low

level exposures• Irritation of skin, eyes, mucous

membranes, upper respiratory tract• High levels may cause dizziness• High levels may cause dizziness,

headache, metallic taste, insomnia, high or low blood pressure, etc.

• Chronic exposures may cause irritability, personality changes, anxiety, hallucinations, psychotic y, , p ybehavior

• Smaller infants, altered behavior patterns lower IQ scores teratogenic

Photo by National Jewish Health

patterns, lower IQ scores, teratogenic affects, cerebral hemorrhage

4

Methamphetamine Release

• Methamphetamine released mainly during “ lti t” h b t“salting out” phase but also during “cooking” phasep

• Methamphetamine also released during “smoking”smoking

Photo by National Jewish Health

5

Meth Surface Contamination

• Current Standards• Current Standards– Surface contamination: 0.05-1.5 µg/100 cm2

• CA 1.5 µg/100 cm2

• CO 0 5 µg/100 cm2• CO 0.5 µg/100 cm2

• Real Labs– Ranged from non-detect to 16,000 µg/100 cm2

A 499 /100 2– Average: 499 µg/100 cm2

• Controlled Cooks– < 2 meters from cook area – average 101 µg/100 cm2

– 2 to 4 meters from cook area – average 41 µg/100 cm2

• Simulated Smoking– Surface areas throughout the room were contaminated withSurface areas throughout the room were contaminated with

up to 35 µg/100 cm2

6

Problem Not Isolated by Geography

Photo by Gazette

7

Photo by National Jewish Health

Concern

• Residents post-meth lab• First responders• Social workers• Vulnerable residents

– About 30-35% of labs seized are residences with childrenresidences with children

– 35% - 55% of children removed from meth labs test positive for

thmeth– 10% of children removed from

homes of heavy users test positive Photo by North Metro Drug Task Force

y pfor meth

8

Household Surface Contamination

• Stainless steel exposure chamberexposure chamber

• 400 mg street gradegrade methamphetamine

• 450°C450 C• 10-20 minutesPhoto by National Jewish Health

9

Household Materials

Carpet

Drywall Linoleum10Photos by National Jewish Health

Methods: Characterization ofPanel SurfacesPanel Surfaces

• Wipe SamplesWipe Samples– Carpet– DrywallDrywall– Linoleum

• Bulk SamplesBulk Samples– Carpet– Drywally a– Linoleum

• NIOSH 9111Photo by National Jewish Health

NIOSH 9111

11

Results: Characterization ofPanel SurfacesPanel Surfaces

Surface Contamination Wipe SamplesSurface Contamination Wipe Samples (µg/100 cm2)

SurfaceSurface Type N Mean Range SD

Carpet 36 27 5.4-70 17

D ll 48 6 6 2 7 29 4 3Drywall 48 6.6 2.7-29 4.3

Linoleum 48 15 5.0-36 8.5

p < 0 05p < 0.05

12

Methods: Characterization ofHand Surface AreaHand Surface Area

• Tempura paintSmooth surface– Smooth surface

– Carpeted surface • 5 4 kg force• 5.4 kg force• Hand area analyzed

Image J– Image J

13

Photo by National Jewish Health

Methods: Dermal Sampling

• Cotton Gloves• Cotton Gloves• Two Hand Conditions

(glove)(glove) – Dry– Simulated Saliva (wet)( )

• Multiple Contacts– 1, 2, or 3, ,

• NIOSH 9111Photo by National Jewish Health

14

Methods: Dermal Transfer Analysis

D l T f• Dermal Transfer Efficiency

TE = (mf/SAT)/SL

• Lognormal• ANOVA

Photo by National Jewish Health

15

Results: Dermal Transfer Analysis

Skin Condition Dry Glove Wet Glove# of

Contacts Carpet Drywall Linoleum Carpet Drywall Linoleum

1 GM 0.16 0.24 0.25 0.71 0.36 0.50

2 GM 0.19 (2.3) 0.27 (1.6) 0.24 (1.4) 0.55 (1.6) 0.42 (1.8) 0.57 (1.2)

3 GM 0.28 0.20 0.22 0.54 0.38 0.55

1 Contact All Surfaces

CombinedGM 0.22 0.49

p < 0.05

16

Methods: Dermal Exposure AnalysisS h i H E d D• Stochastic Human Exposure and Dose Simulation for multimedia (SHEDS-Multimedia)

Absorbed dose estimates– Absorbed dose estimates– Many inputs

• How & when contaminated• Surface loading methamphetamine• Dermal transfer efficiency (TE)• Exposure factors

TE Parameters: Default: CA OEHHA

Surface Level Concentrations:0 1 µg/100 cm2

• Exposure factors

– Default: CA OEHHA– Our TE data

• Wet gloves

– 0.1 µg/100 cm2

– 0.2 µg/100 cm2

– 0.5 µg/100 cm2g• Dry gloves

0.5 µg/100 cm– 1.5 µg/100 cm2

17

Results: Exposure Analysis

3.5

Absorbed Dose Estimates from SHEDS-Multimedia

2.5

3Mean

95th Percentile

1

1.5

2

ose µg/kg/day

0

0.5

1

Absorbe

d D

RfD = 0.3 mg/kg/day

Default

Dry Only

Wet Only

Default

Dry Only

Wet Only

Default

Dry Only

Wet Only

Default

Dry Only

Wet Only

0.1 0.2 0.5 1.5

Surface Contamination  Concentration (µg/100 cm2) Residue‐Skin Transfer Efficiency  Parameter

18

Take Home Points

• Wet TE > dry TE for all surfaces• Wet TE on carpet > drywall• Wet TE > dry TE for all surfaces combined• Contamination levels of 1.5 and 0.5 µg/100 cm2

resulted in predicted absorbed doses > RfDR d d f l l l• Recommended surface cleanup level:

0.2 µg/100 cm2

19

Acknowledgments

• Drs. Mike Van Dyke & John Martyny• Project supported by grant #2009CKWX0503 through

th U S D t t f J tithe U.S. Department of Justice

20

Questions?

Kate SerranoKate Serrano

Photo by National Jewish Health

Kate SerranoKate Serrano(303) 270(303) 270--27912791

SerranoK@NJHealth.orgSerranoK@NJHealth.org