RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Understanding UV exposure is essential for the assessment of its contribution to the occupational risk of pilots developing ocular and skin pathologies. The objective of this observational study was to measure the UV exposure of pilots flying between the United Kingdom and a range of destinations at three different seasons.METHODS: The in-flight UV exposure of pilots was measured on 322 Monarch Airlines short-haul flights on the Airbus A321-231 and Airbus A320-214 to 31 destinations, mostly in Europe, from 4 UK airports in September 2016-August 2017. The erythema effective and UV-A doses were compared with the ICNIRP guidance and typical recreational weekend exposure of UK office workers.RESULTS: The erythema effective radiant doses did not exceed 0.1 SED. For most of the flights, the UV-A exposure was also low. On 27 single sector flights, UV-A exposure could have exceeded the ICNIRP guidance if eye protection was not used.DISCUSSION: The UV exposure in a cockpit is mostly governed by the presence of direct sunlight and the duration of a flight. The average monthly exposures were low and significantly below weekend recreational exposures of UK office workers over a similar period. To assess the contribution of occupational UV exposure to the risk of developing sun-related ocular and cutaneous pathologies, it is important to consider the accumulative flight time, destinations, and UV attenuation of aircraft windshields. Additionally, leisure and recreational outdoor time needs to be considered before meaningful overall risk analysis can be undertaken.Baczynska KA, Brown S, Chorley AC, O'Hagan JB, Khazova M, Lyachev A, Wittlich M. In-flight UV-A exposure of commercial airline pilots. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2020; 91(6):501-510.
Asunto(s)
Exposición Profesional/análisis , Pilotos , Rayos Ultravioleta/efectos adversos , Medicina Aeroespacial , Eritema , HumanosRESUMEN
There are several wearable products specially developed or marketed for studying sleep, circadian rhythms, and light levels. However, new recommendations relating to human physiological responses to light have changed what measurements researchers may demand. The performances of 11 light-logging dosimeters from eight manufacturers were compared. The directional and spectral sensitivities, linearity, dynamic range, and resolution were tested for seven models, and compared along with other published data. The sample mainly comprised light-logging actigraphy dosimeters wearable as badges, in accordance with measurement protocols for larger-scale field studies. A proposed standard for optical performance assessments is set out.
Asunto(s)
Actigrafía/instrumentación , Ritmo Circadiano/fisiología , Fenómenos Ópticos , Dosímetros de Radiación/normas , Sueño/fisiología , HumanosRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: The ocular effects of excess solar radiation exposure are well documented. Recent evidence suggests that ocular ultraviolet radiation (UVR) exposure to professional pilots may fall outside international guideline limits unless eye protection is used. Nonprescription sunglasses should be manufactured to meet either international or national standards. The mean increase in UVR and blue light hazards at altitude has been quantified and the aim of this research was to assess the effectiveness of typical pilot sunglasses in reducing UVR and blue light hazard exposure in flight. METHOD: A series of sunglass filter transmittance measurements were taken from personal sunglasses (N = 20) used by pilots together with a series of new sunglasses (N = 18). RESULTS: All nonprescription sunglasses measured conformed to international standards for UVR transmittance and offered sufficient UVR protection for pilots. There was no difference between right and left lenses or between new and used sunglasses. All sunglasses offered sufficient attenuation to counter the mean increase in blue light exposure that pilots experience at altitude, although used sunglasses with scratched lenses were marginally less effective. One pair of prescription sunglasses offered insufficient UVR attenuation for some flights, but would have met requirements of international and national standards for UV-A transmittance. This was likely due to insufficient UVR blocking properties of the lens material. CONCLUSIONS: Lenses manufactured to minimally comply with standards for UVR transmittance could result in excess UVR exposure to a pilot based on in-flight irradiance data; an additional requirement of less than 10% transmittance at 380 nm is recommended.