Trial reportJournal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology
Biomonitoring and evaluation of permethrin uptake in forestry workers using permethrin-treated tick-proof pants.
Trial report in Journal of exposure science & environmental epidemiology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of Environmental Temperature and Humidity on Permethrin Biomarkers of Exposure in U.S. Soldiers Wearing Permethrin-Treated Uniforms.The American journal of tropical medicine and hygiene · 2020Trial
- Assessing Durability and Safety of Permethrin Impregnated Uniforms Used by Outdoor Workers to Prevent Tick Bites after One Year of Use.Journal of medical entomology · 2022Article
- Bioabsorption and effectiveness of long-lasting permethrin-treated uniforms over three months among North Carolina outdoor workers.Parasites & vectors · 2019Article
- Role of body composition and physical activity on permethrin urinary biomarker concentrations while wearing treated military uniforms.Toxicology letters · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We conducted a randomized case-control trial to analyze uptake of the insecticide/arcaricide permethrin in wearers of permethrin-impregnated and non-impregnated pants in German forestry. Eighty-two male workers were each equipped for a 16-week period with permethrin-treated (test group) or with non-treated work pants (control group). Pants with or without lining to protect against cuts, obtained from two different distributors, were worn in each group. Urinary permethrin metabolite levels were measured by GC-MS/MS before, during and after wearing of the pants. Permethrin uptake was calculated using additional questionnaire data. In the control group, metabolite levels in the range of environmental background exposure (median: ~0.5 μg/l) were measured. Subjects wearing impregnated pants showed consistently significantly higher exposure levels even before the first use of the pants with a maximum after 1 week of wearing the pants (median: ~12.5 μg/l). Significant differences in internal exposure were found depending on which of the distributors the pants came from. Metabolite levels decreased probably due to permethrin losses associated with laundering the pants. Calculated permethrin uptake is below the value corresponding to the WHO-proposed acceptable daily intake. Based on our data, a marginally increased cancer risk compared with the general population cannot be excluded when wearing impregnated pants over a working-lifetime period.
Indexed as
Identifiers
25967068What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.