National Academies Press: OpenBook

Strategies to Protect the Health of Deployed U.S. Forces: Force Protection and Decontamination (1999)

Chapter: Appendix D: Evaluating Skin Decontamination Techniques

« Previous: Appendix C: Evaluations of Barrier Creams
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Evaluating Skin Decontamination Techniques." National Research Council. 1999. Strategies to Protect the Health of Deployed U.S. Forces: Force Protection and Decontamination. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9717.
×
Page 221
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Evaluating Skin Decontamination Techniques." National Research Council. 1999. Strategies to Protect the Health of Deployed U.S. Forces: Force Protection and Decontamination. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9717.
×
Page 222
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D: Evaluating Skin Decontamination Techniques." National Research Council. 1999. Strategies to Protect the Health of Deployed U.S. Forces: Force Protection and Decontamination. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/9717.
×
Page 223

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Appendix D Evaluating Skin Decontamination Techniques Howard I. Maibach and Hongbo Zhai 1 Both in vitro and in viva techniques have been developed to determine skin decontamination. A brief introduction to the models and a summary of the relative data from recent studies follows. The models described below have been developed with nonvesicant agents that are available for occupational and home use. IN VIVO DECONTAMINATION MODEL Wester et al. (1991) tested the extent and rate of decontamination on rhesus monkeys. A water-soluble chemical, glyphosate, was completely removed from rhesus monkey skin with three successive soap and water or water only washes. Approximately 90-percent of the glyphosate was removed in the first wash. There was no difference between washing with soap and water and washing with water only. Alachlor, a lipid-soluble chemical, was also removed by washing with soap and water and water only. In contrast to glyphosate, however, more alachlor was removed with soap and water than with water alone. Although the first alachlor washing removed most of the chemical, successive washings contributed to overall decontamination. Methylene bisphenyl isocyanate, an industrial chemical, is a potent 1The following material was prepared for the use of the principal investigators of this study. The opinions and conclusions herein are the authors' and not necessarily those of the National Research Council. 221

222 STRATEGIES TO PROTECT THE HEALTH OF DEPLOYED U.S. FORCES contact sensitizer. Decontamination potential was determined in viva in rhesus monkeys. A grid of 1-cm areas was drawn on the abdomen of the monkey (the same can be done with humans) and the same amount of chemical applied to all areas. At set times, individual grid areas were washed/decontaminated by water-only, 5-percent soap, 50-percent soap, polypropylene glycol, polypropylene glycol cleaner, and corn oil. After each washing procedure, skin tape stripping was used to quantify re- sidual contamination. Water-only and soap-and-water washing were minimally effective. Polypropylene glycol, polypropylene glycol cleaner, and corn oil were more effective. The chemical that was not removed by the washing procedures was recovered in the tape stripping (Wester and Maibach, 1999a). Two factors affect in vivo skin decontamination: (1) the "rubbing effect" that removes loose surface stratum corneum from natu- ral skin desquamation, and (2) the "solvent effect," which is related to chemical lipophilicity and may influence the washing effects (Wester et al., 1991~. van Hooidonk et al. (1983) evaluated a wide variety of common materials as skin decontaminants against chemical agents. Flour followed by wet tissue paper removed 93 percent of VX and 98 percent of mus- tard. This treatment also reduced the penetration of mustard (measured by radiolabel) and VX (measured by anti-acetylcholinesterase activity). In vivo tests confirmed a significant reduction in mortality with flour/ wet tissue paper after VX and soman exposures. The authors found that washing alone (with no flour pretreatment), either with water or soap and water, was highly effective against nerve agents, but resulted in much larger areas of skin damage for mustard. Therefore, the authors concluded that the best decontaminant for mustard, VX, and soman was decontamination with flour followed by an after-treatment with wet tissue. IN VITRO DECONTAMINATION MODEL In vitro skin mounted in diffusion cells can be decontaminated with solvents. The mounted skin is fragile, however, and cannot be rubbed as vigorously as in vivo skin. Another in vitro technique is mixing powdered human stratum corneum with radiolabeled formulations (Wester et al., 1987~. For example, a water-only wash (and subsequent centrifugation) removed only 4.6 + 1.3 percent of the "bound" alachlor. However, when the bound alachlor- powdered human stratum corneum was washed with 10-percent soap and water, 77.2 + 5.7 percent was removed; with 50- percent soap and water, 90.0 + 0.5 percent was removed. This model would predict that alachlor cannot be removed from the skin by washing with water alone but that soap will decontaminate the skin. The reason

APPENDIX D 223 may be that the "lipid" constituents of soap offer a more favorable parti- tioning environment for the alachlor (Wester and Maibach, l999b). These results were confirmed in in viva studies. Large-scale in vitro decontami- nation screening can be done with the powdered human stratum cor- neum model. In vitro studies conducted by decontaminating pig skin exposed to radiolabeled DFP (an organophosphorus compound, cholinesterase in- hibitor) and radiolabeled n-butyl 2-choloroethylsulfide (a vesicant) com- pared the decontamination efficiency of a water shower (tap water), the M-258 kit, and a pad impregnated with a reactive resin mixture. Decon- tamination efficiencies were found to be similar for all three methods (Reifenrath, 1990~. Shower decontamination with an aqueous surfactant solution did not increase the skin penetration of topically applied soman or thickened soman (Reifenrath et al., 1984~. References Reinfenrath, W.G. 1990. In vitro determination of skin decontamination efficacy using a water shower. Toxicologist 10: 615. Reifenrath, W.G., M.M. Mershon, F.B. Brinkley, G.A. Miura, C.A. Broomfield, and H.B. Cranford. 1984. Evaluation of diethyl malonate as a simulant for 1,2,2-trimethylpropyl methylphosphonofluoridate (soman) in shower decontamination of the skin. Journal of Pharmaceutical Science 73: 1388-1392. van Hooidonk, C., B.I. Ceulen, J. Bock, and J. van Genderen. 1983. CW Agents and the Skin: Penetration and Decontamination. Pp. 153-160 in Proceedings of the International Symposium on Protection against Chemical Warfare Agents. Umea, Sweden: National Defence Research Institute. Wester, R.C., M. Mobagen, and H.I. Maibach 1987. In vivo and in vitro absorption and binding to powered stratum corneum as methods to evaluate skin absorption of envi- ronmental chemical contaminants from ground and surface water. Journal of Toxicol- ogy and Environmental Health 21~3~: 367-374. Wester, R.C., J. Melendres, R. Sarason, J. McMaster, and H.I. Maibach. 1991. Glyphosate skin binding, absorption, residual tissue distribution, and skin decontamination. Fun- damentals of Applied Toxicology 16: 725-732. Wester, R.C., and H.I. Maibach. 1999a. In Vivo Methods for Percutaneous Absorption Mea- surements. Pp. 215-227 in Percutaneous Absorption, 3rd ea., R.L. Bronaugh and H.I. Maibach, eds. New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc. Wester, R.C., and H.I. Maibach. l999b. Dermal Decontamination and Percutaneous Absorp- tion. Pp. 241-254 in Percutaneous Absorption, 3rd ea., R.L. Bronaugh and H.I. Maibach, eds. New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc.

Next: Appendix E: Percutaneous Absorption »
Strategies to Protect the Health of Deployed U.S. Forces: Force Protection and Decontamination Get This Book
×
 Strategies to Protect the Health of Deployed U.S. Forces: Force Protection and Decontamination
Buy Paperback | $75.00 Buy Ebook | $59.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Since Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm, Gulf War veterans have expressed concerns that their postdeployment medical symptoms could have been caused by hazardous exposures or other deployment-related factors. Potential exposure to a broad range of CB and other harmful agents was not unique to Gulf operations. Hazardous exposures have been a component of all military operations in this century. Nevertheless, the Gulf War deployment focused national attention on the potential, but uncertain, relationship between the presence of CB agents in theater and symptoms reported by military personnel. Particular attention has been given to the potential long-term health effects of low-level exposures to CB agents.

In the spring of 1996, Deputy Secretary of Defense John White met with the leadership of the National Academies to discuss the DoD's continuing efforts to improve protection of military personnel from adverse health effects during deployments in hostile environments. Although many lessons learned from previous assessments of Operation Desert Shield/Desert Storm have been reported, prospective analyses are still needed. Strategies to Protect the Health of Deployed U.S. Forces: Force Protection and Decontamination, which addresses the issues of physical protection and decontamination, is one of four initial reports that will be submitted in response to that request.

Specifically, this report includes a review and evaluation of the following areas:

  • the adequacy of current protective equipment and protective measures (as well as equipment in development)
  • the efficacy of current and proposed methods for decontaminating personnel and equipment after exposures to CB agents
  • current policies, doctrine, and training to protect and decontaminate personnel and equipment in future deployments (i.e., major regional conflicts [MRCs], lesser regional conflicts [LRCs], and operations other than war [OOTWs])
  • the impact of equipment and procedures on unit effectiveness and other human performance factors
  • current and projected military capabilities to provide emergency response

READ FREE ONLINE

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!