Well thought note John. The idea of air shower is troubling to me as well for the reason you mentioned below:
I worked at Syntex at this time and we could never demonstrate that air showers worked for this purpose and it was troubling to think that it was possible that we were just spreading particles of active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) [or nanoparticle in this case] around and/or imbedding particles into suits which were subject to shedding upon degowning.
From: John Farris <John.Farris**At_Symbol_Here**safebridge.com>
Subject: RE: [Control_Banding_Strategies] [DCHAS-L] Air Showers
Date: June 6, 2016 at 1:17:56 PM EDT
Removal of particles from PPE has been studied for several years in the pharmaceutical industry. In the late 1970s and early 1980s, air showers were installed throughout the industry as a means to remove potent pharmaceutical powders from protective suits with little or no data on their efficacy. Syntex and Eli Lilly (independently) studied this through air and surface monitoring studies. I worked at Syntex at this time and we could never demonstrate that air showers worked for this purpose and it was troubling to think that it was possible that we were just spreading particles of active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) around and/or imbedding particles into suits which were subject to shedding upon degowning. Air monitoring studies done in degowning rooms indicated that residual API could be present and available to breathe. It has been a design concept in the industry to "keep the degowning room clean at all times" to avoid creating an atmosphere that could lead to exposure where respirators and other PPE were taken off.
Beginning in the 1990s, more definitive (but to my knowledge unpublished) studies were undertaken that showed that a fine misting shower could remove particles more efficiently than air showers by a factor of as much as 25 fold. Additional data were generated on behalf of a misting shower vendor and their pharmaceutical client by SafeBridge in 2008. These studies confirmed what had been demonstrated by Eli Lilly in the 90s and by SafeBridge subsequently in actual testing in pharmaceutical working environments. Fine misting showers (using a minimum of water to first encapsulate particles and then lead to sheeting action to remove them from PPE) have become the standard in pharmaceutical potent compound manufacturing areas.
One vendor in the UK is PBSC Ltd.
There are other US vendors but PBSC was part of the SafeBridge study. At the moment, I am not at liberty to share the paper generated on behalf of our client and I do not see it on their website.
Please email me privately if you would like more information.
John P. Farris, CIH
SafeBridge Consultants, Inc.
1924 Old Middlefield Way
Mountain View, CA 94043
Tel: (650) 961-4820 ext. 229
Fax: (650) 623-0096
This e-mail message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee named above and contain information that is privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, distribution, or copying is strictly unauthorized and prohibited. If you received this e-mail message in error, please immediately notify the sender by replying to this e-mail message or by telephone and delete. Thank you.
Andrew Cutz, CIH, FAIHA - | Moderator, GlobalOccHyg List | http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/globalocchyg-list/ (on Yahoo Groups) | RSS Feed http://rss.groups.yahoo.com/group/globalocchyg-list/rss | http://tinyurl.com/GlobalOccHyg-List (on LinkedIn) NEW!
Previous post | Top of Page | Next post