Andreia Moreira

Biomonitoring allows for the assessment of internal exposure to various pesticides and metabolites. Following PRISMA guidelines, this systematic review aims to summarise innovative biomonitoring techniques for assessing pesticide exposure in agricultural workers, their advantages and limitations, and their applicability. The search of the Medline/PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus, and Web of Science databases identified 14 articles dealing with new techniques for biomonitoring pesticide exposure in agricultural workers. These new methodologies have identified several biomarkers associated with exposure to organophosphates. Most of the included studies combine and/or improve traditional methods to overcome their limitations. This leads to more sensitive, specific, and precise techniques with lower detection and quantification limits. Therefore, it is necessary to thoroughly analyse and test new biomonitoring methods for assessing pesticide exposure. These techniques can complement qualitative risk assessments and aid in developing strategies to protect public health and the environment.

Human pesticide exposure remains a significant issue, impacting both the environment and human health. Occupational pesticide exposure is primarily linked to improper worker practices, often due to a lack of knowledge or difficulty interpreting label information and other technical aspects of pesticide application. This systematic review aims to identify the pesticides most used by agricultural workers, the symptoms they experience due to exposure, and the GHS hazard statements on these pesticide labels. Following the PRISMA guidelines, the search identified 16 articles addressing health effects associated with the most frequently used pesticides. These studies predominantly come from Asia (68.8%), Africa (25%), and America (6.2%), with most pesticides being outside the list approved by the EC. Related symptoms were reported in 80 to 100% of the studies that included these pesticides. An evident relationship has been identified between GHS hazard statements and associated symptoms for certain pesticides. Therefore, companies and public authorities must collaborate to improve workers’ training, particularly in reading and interpreting product labels. Additionally, they must thoroughly explain the risks associated with improper pesticide practices and application to safeguard workers’ health.

The main objective of this review was to determine the main risks that agricultural workers are exposed to during pesticide application, which may have a harmful effect on their health and on public health. This systematic review was based on the PRISMA guidelines. A search for articles was conducted in the Medline/PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Web of Science databases. Fifteen articles were selected considering their assessment of agricultural workers’ knowledge, perceptions, attitudes, practices, and behaviours, identifying the main risks and risk factors for disease associated with the unsafe handling of pesticides. The main risk factors identified were age, education, pesticide safety training, farming experience, and contact with other farmers/intermediaries resulting in pesticide access. The most frequent risk behaviour was an application of pesticides without personal protective equipment (PPE), incorrect disposal of empty packaging and waste, and undervaluation of label information, as well as other unsafe practices. Multidisciplinary and more effective training must be delivered to enhance pesticide-safe usage. This will empower workers to adopt more conscious and safer behaviours while using pesticides.