Has anyone ever had experienced of implementing this test in their workplace. The HSE advise that this is carried out for spray painters where the presence of urinary diamine is measured in creatinine. Having undertook a similar exercise 2 years when working for a different organisation I am sceptical about the accuracy of this type of measurement. During that exercise a widely used prviate healthcare and occ health provider made a catastrophic error when measruring for the presence of chromium in creatinine, initially concluding that levels were very low only to review this 18 MONTHS LATER and discover they had made an error in their calculations. Having just spoken to another local occ. health provider she is also very sceptical about the significance of such tests and would never rely on them. She provides an occ health service to other similiar companies and advises not to undertake such tests - she says lung function is a far better indicator. This view is in direct contradiction to the advice given by the HSE. So, I am now left totally confused..............anyone have experience of using this? Thanks

I would suggest this is far too 'medical' for this forum. I doubt anybody with just IOSH qualifications would be competent to advise on this. Suggest you contact another independent medical doctor, with experience of occupational health. Or try the HSE EMA (Employment Medical Adviser) for advice/clarification of their guidance. As a H&S manager/advisor - you don't have to know everything, but know who to ask when you need specialist advice.

JJ - I was only enquiring about other users experiences. Im quite sure others who use this forum have experiences to tell. Having spoken to two different occ health providers I am left nonethewiser. Both are sceptical about the relevance of such tests. This coupled with my previous experience leaves me even more dubious about the relevance of such tests. I will continue to seek further medical advice on such tests. I see the HSL offer this test - I will contact them later.

"A competent Occupational Hygienist will advise, of whom there are quite a few who use this site. One may come along soon." Someone called? Urine testing for isocyanates is something that we conduct on our paint sprayers on an annual basis, usually in conjunction with personnal air sampling. The benefits over personnal sampling however is that it takes into account skin contact/absorbtion in addition to inhalation and does not involve workers wearing glass pots full of liquid chemicals. The HSL labs: http://www.hsl.gov.uk/me...ces%20list%202010_11.pdf Will usually send you the pots for both pre and post shift analysis, make sure these are labelled correctly. (other companies are available for similar analysis, SAL for example, but make sure they are UKAS acreddited) Details on interpreting the results can be found here: http://www.hsl.gov.uk/me...0part%201_layout%201.pdf However, the report/results will usually tell you of any recommended actions, even if it just says repeat in 12 months time. HSE publication INDG245 can provide you with some useful information about the whats, whys and when for biological monitoring and information to supply to union reps and workforce: http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/indg245.htm Basically contact HSL, get some sample pots sent, label them up, get the workers to use them pre + post shift, send for analysis and await the results. Make sure you have the material safety data sheets for the substances that they are using. It would NOT be unheard of for a paint sprayer to return a positive result for a urine test at work for a substance that he was not using (there are 3 main types of isocyanate MDI TDI and HDI), eg. from doing additional ad-hoc work outside in his garage - hence the pre/post shift analysis requirement. Hope this has been of use Des

Try Kate Jones at HSL. This is her special area of expertise and I have always found her most objective and helpful. Her phone number is 01298 218 435 Chris

With any biological monitoring you need to have an understanding of how the chemical reacts in the body. Particularly with the skin, this is a large reservoir that can hold chemical for some considerable time, releasing it only slowly into the body. In a study of systemic uptake of 5-hydroxy-n-methylpyrolidone, not only did urinary uptake due to exposure of one hand for 15 minutes to a 15% solution in water equate to inhalation of 10 mg/m3 for 8 hours, but it took 30 hours for the urinary concentration to return to near normal. I haven't looked at isocyanates on this, but I am sure that the Health and Safety Laboratories will have some data. When Kate Jones gave a talk to the local BOHS group in Birmingham she stressed the need to understand when to take the biological sample so as to be sure that you were getting the right results. In the study mentioned above, urinary concentration from skin exposure continued to increase for some 15 hours after skin contact had ended, an illustration of what she had been saying. Chris