Skip to main content

Field evaluation and comparison of five methods of sampling lead dust on carpets

Publication ,  Journal Article
Bai, Z; Yiin, L-M; Rich, DQ; Adgate, JL; Ashley, PJ; Lioy, PJ; Rhoads, GG; Zhang, J
Published in: American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal
2003

Five methods of sampling lead-contaminated dust on carpets were evaluated and compared in 33 New Jersey homes of children with elevated blood lead levels. The five sampling methods were (1) wipe, (2) adhesive label, (3) C18 sheet, (4) vacuum, and (5) hand rinse. Samples were collected side by side on the same carpets within the homes. Among the five methods the wipe and vacuum methods showed high percentages of detectable samples, good reproducibility, and significant correlations with other methods. C18 sheets and adhesive labels collected the least quantity of lead dust, with high percentages of undetectable samples. Because of the limited ability of sampling lead on carpets and the relatively high cost for laboratory analysis, C18 sheets or adhesive labels are not considered feasible sampling techniques. The hand rinse method also was not feasible for carpet sampling, because it was difficult to conduct in the field and laboratory, and it was subject to inconsistency and cross contamination. Wipes, which collected lead dust from carpet surfaces, were believed to be the most appropriate method for measuring lead from carpets accessible to children. However, because of the low pickup from carpets, wipes may not be an appropriate measuring tool to assess the levels of total lead contamination in carpets. The authors recommend using surface wipe sampling to measure accessible lead from carpets for exposure assessment, and vacuum sampling to obtain the information on total lead accumulation.

Duke Scholars

Published In

American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal

DOI

Publication Date

2003

Volume

64

Issue

4

Start / End Page

528 / 532

Related Subject Headings

  • Environmental & Occupational Health
 

Citation

APA
Chicago
ICMJE
MLA
NLM
Bai, Z., Yiin, L.-M., Rich, D. Q., Adgate, J. L., Ashley, P. J., Lioy, P. J., … Zhang, J. (2003). Field evaluation and comparison of five methods of sampling lead dust on carpets. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal, 64(4), 528–532. https://doi.org/10.1202/1542-8125(2003)64<528:FEACOF>2.0.CO;2
Bai, Z., L. -. M. Yiin, D. Q. Rich, J. L. Adgate, P. J. Ashley, P. J. Lioy, G. G. Rhoads, and J. Zhang. “Field evaluation and comparison of five methods of sampling lead dust on carpets.” American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal 64, no. 4 (2003): 528–32. https://doi.org/10.1202/1542-8125(2003)64<528:FEACOF>2.0.CO;2.
Bai Z, Yiin L-M, Rich DQ, Adgate JL, Ashley PJ, Lioy PJ, et al. Field evaluation and comparison of five methods of sampling lead dust on carpets. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal. 2003;64(4):528–32.
Bai, Z., et al. “Field evaluation and comparison of five methods of sampling lead dust on carpets.” American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal, vol. 64, no. 4, 2003, pp. 528–32. Scival, doi:10.1202/1542-8125(2003)64<528:FEACOF>2.0.CO;2.
Bai Z, Yiin L-M, Rich DQ, Adgate JL, Ashley PJ, Lioy PJ, Rhoads GG, Zhang J. Field evaluation and comparison of five methods of sampling lead dust on carpets. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal. 2003;64(4):528–532.

Published In

American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal

DOI

Publication Date

2003

Volume

64

Issue

4

Start / End Page

528 / 532

Related Subject Headings

  • Environmental & Occupational Health