Analysis of Hexavalent Chromium in Cement Samples from Countries within and outside the EU: A Study from the International Contact Dermatitis Research Group
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online August, 2023
Analysis of Hexavalent Chromium in Cement Samples from Countries within and outside the EU: A Study from the International Contact Dermatitis Research Group
Abstract: Background: Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) caused by hexavalent chromium (Cr(VI)) is often severe and difficult to treat. The content of Cr(VI) in cement can be reduced by, for example, addition of iron(II) sulfate. Since 2005 the content of Cr(VI) in cement is regulated in the EU Directive 2003/53/EC and must not exceed 2 ppm. Since this regulation came into force, ACD caused by cement has markedly been reduced.
Objective: To investigate Cr(VI) and total chromium content in samples of cement from countries within and outside the EU.
Methods: The members of the International Contact Dermatitis Research Group (ICDRG) were invited to participate in the study with the aim to collect cement samples from geographically different areas. The content of Cr(VI) in the samples was estimated by the diphenyl carbazide spot test, atomic absorption spectroscopy was used to assess the total chromium content.
Results: Forty-five cement samples were analyzed, containing amounts of Cr(VI) from <0.1 to >70 ppm. Twenty-one samples contained >2 ppm Cr(VI), 24 contained less. Four of 17 samples from within the EU contained >2 ppm Cr(VI), that is, higher amounts than stipulated in the EU directive, as compared with 17 samples from countries outside the EU.
Conclusion: In countries outside the EU, significantly more cement samples contained >2 ppm Cr(VI).
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
SupinoS, MalandrinoO, TestaM, et al.Sustainability in the EU cement industry: The Italian and German experiences. J Cleaner Prod, 2016; 112:430–442.
2.
NaikTR.Sustainability of the cement and concrete industries. UWM Center for By-Products Utilization, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI, USA; 2005.
3.
AndrewRM.Global CO2 emissions from cement production. Earth Syst Sci Data, 2018; 10(1):195–217.
4.
YıldızS, YilmazM. The importance of occupational health and safety (OHS) and OHS budgeting in terms of social sustainability in the construction sector. J Build Mater Sci, 2020; 2–10.
5.
MorettiL, CaroS. Critical analysis of the life cycle assessment of the Italian cement industry. J Cleaner Prod, 2017; 152:198–210.
6.
RiccardiR, OggioniG, ToninelliR. Efficiency analysis of world cement industry in presence of undesirable output: Application of data envelopment analysis and directional distance function. Energy Policy, 2012; 44:140–152.
7.
SetoKE, ChurchillCJ, PanesarDK. Influence of fly ash allocation approaches on the life cycle assessment of cement-based materials. J Cleaner Prod, 2017; 157:65–75.
8.
EngebrigtsenJK.Some investigations on hypersensitiveness to bichromate in cement workers. Acta Derm Venereol, 1952; 32(6):462–468.
9.
FregertS.Occupational dermatitis in a 10-year material. Contact Dermatitis, 1975; 1(2):96–107.
AvnstorpC.Prevalence of cement eczema in Denmark before and since addition of ferrous sulfate to Danish cement. Acta Derm Venereol, 1989; 69(2):151–155.
BregnbakD, AvnstorpC. Cement. In: John SM, Johansen JD, Rustemeyer T, et al., eds. Kanerva's Occupational Dermatology. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2018, pp. 1–17.
14.
JaegerH, PelloniE. [Positive skin tests with bichromates in cement eczema]. Dermatologica, 1950; 100(4–6):207–216.
15.
GeierJ, KrautheimA, UterW, et al.Occupational contact allergy in the building trade in Germany: Influence of preventive measures and changing exposure. Int Arch Occup Environ Health, 2011; 84(4):403–411.
16.
ZachariaeCO, AgnerT, MennéT. Chromium allergy in consecutive patients in a country where ferrous sulfate has been added to cement since 1981. Contact Dermatitis, 1996; 35(2):83–85.
17.
Bensefa-ColasL, StocksSJ, McNameeR, et al.Effectiveness of the European chromium(vi) directive for cement implementation on occupational allergic contact dermatitis occurrence: Assessment in France and the U.K. Br J Dermatol, 2017; 177(3):873–876.
18.
StocksSJ, McNameeR, TurnerS, et al.Has European Union legislation to reduce exposure to chromate in cement been effective in reducing the incidence of allergic contact dermatitis attributed to chromate in the UK?. Occup Environ Med, 2012; 69(2):150–152.
19.
IrvineC, PughCE, HansenEJ, et al.Cement dermatitis in underground workers during construction of the Channel Tunnel. Occup Med (Lond), 1994; 44(1):17–23.
20.
ÖzkayaE, AslanMSE. Occupational allergic contact dermatitis: A 24-year, retrospective cohort study from Turkey. Contact Dermatitis, 2021; 85(5):503–513.
21.
DearK, PalmerA, NixonR. Allergic chromate dermatitis to cement in Australia: An ongoing problem. Occup Environ Med, 2020; 77(9):658.
22.
SarmaN.Occupational allergic contact dermatitis among construction workers in India. Indian J Dermatol, 2009; 54(2):137–141.
MowitzM, ZimersonE, HaukssonI, et al.Chromate and amine contact allergies in workers manufacturing precast concrete elements. Contact Dermatitis, 2016; 75(6):363–369.
25.
BregnbakD, JohansenJD, JellesenMS, et al.Chromium(VI) release from leather and metals can be detected with a diphenylcarbazide spot test. Contact Dermatitis, 2015; 73(5):281–288.
26.
FregertS, GruvbergerB, SandahlE. Reduction of chromate in cement by iron sulfate. Contact Dermatitis, 1979; 5(1):39–42.
27.
WongCC, GamboniSE, PalmerAM, et al.Occupational allergic contact dermatitis to chromium from cement: Estimating the size of the problem in Australia. Australas J Dermatol, 2015; 56(4):290–293.
28.
BruzeM, GruvbergerB, HradilE. Chromate sensitization and elicitation from cement with iron sulfate. Acta Derm Venereol, 1990; 70(2):160–162.
29.
EštokováA, PalaščákováL, SingovszkáE, HolubM. Analysis of the Chromium Concentrations in Cement Materials. Procedia Eng, 2012; 42:123–130.
HedbergYS, WeiZ, MoncadaF. Release of hexavalent chromium from cement collected in Honduras and Sweden. Contact Dermatitis, 2020; 83(2):122–124.
33.
TandonR, AartsB. Chromium, nickel and cobalt contents of some Australian cements. Contact Dermatitis, 1993; 28(4):201–205.
34.
TurkK, RietschelRL. Effect of processing cement to concrete on hexavalent chromium levels. Contact Dermatitis, 1993; 28(4):209–211.
35.
AlinaghiF, ThyssenJP, ZachariaeC, et al.No immediate effect of regulatory reduction of chromium in leather among adult chromium allergic patients. Contact Dermatitis, 2021; 85(5):514–522.
36.
BregnbakD, ThyssenJP, ZachariaeC, et al.Characteristics of chromium-allergic dermatitis patients prior to regulatory intervention for chromium in leather: A questionnaire study. Contact Dermatitis, 2014; 71(6):338–347.
37.
HansenMB, JohansenJD, MennéT. Chromium allergy: Significance of both Cr(III) and Cr(VI). Contact Dermatitis, 2003; 49(4):206–212.
38.
HansenMB, MennéT, JohansenJD. Cr(III) reactivity and foot dermatitis in Cr(VI) positive patients. Contact Dermatitis, 2006; 54(3):140–144.
39.
HansenMB, MenneT, JohansenJD. Cr(III) and Cr(VI) in leather and elicitation of eczema. Contact Dermatitis, 2006; 54(5):278–282.
40.
HansenMB, RydinS, MennéT, et al.Quantitative aspects of contact allergy to chromium and exposure to chrome-tanned leather. Contact Dermatitis, 2002; 47(3):127–134.
41.
HedbergYS, ErfaniB, MaturaM, et al.Chromium(III) release from chromium-tanned leather elicits allergic contact dermatitis: A use test study. Contact Dermatitis, 2018; 78(5):307–314.
42.
World Health Organization. International Programme on Chemical Safety, Chromium. Geneva: World Health Organization;. 1988.
VermaKK, ZimersonE, BruzeM, et al.Is a high concentration of hexavalent chromium in Indian cement causing an increase in the frequency of cement dermatitis in India?. Contact Dermatitis, 2018; 79(1):49–51.
45.
Aalto-KorteK, KoskelaK, PesonenM. Construction workers' skin disorders in the Finnish Register of Occupational Diseases 2005–2016. Contact Dermatitis, 2020; 83(6):437–441.
46.
BregnbakD, JohansenJD, JellesenMS, et al.Chromium allergy and dermatitis: Prevalence and main findings. Contact Dermatitis, 2015; 73(5):261–280.
47.
SchwensenJF, MennéT, VeienNK, et al.Occupational contact dermatitis in blue-collar workers: Results from a multicentre study from the Danish Contact Dermatitis Group (2003–2012). Contact Dermatitis, 2014; 71(6):348–355.
48.
AvnstorpC.Follow-up of workers from the prefabricated concrete industry after the addition of ferrous sulphate to Danish cement. Contact Dermatitis, 1989; 20(5):365–371.
49.
BurrowsD.Chromium: Metabolism and Toxicity. Boca Raton, FL.: CRC Press; 1983.
MilnerJE.Ascorbic acid in the prevention of chromium dermatitis. J Occup Med, 1980; 22(1):51–52.
55.
RomagueraC, GrimaltF, VilaplanaJ, et al.Formulation of a barrier cream against chromate. Contact Dermatitis, 1985; 13(2):49–52.
56.
SamitzMH, ShragerJ. Prevention of dermatitis in the printing and lithographing industries. Arch Dermatol, 1966; 94(3):307–309.
57.
AvnstorpC.Risk factors for cement eczema. Contact Dermatitis, 1991; 25(2):81–88.
58.
ChristophersenJ, MennéT, TanghøjP, et al.Clinical patch test data evaluated by multivariate analysis. Danish Contact Dermatitis Group. Contact Dermatitis, 1989; 21(5):291–299.
