Available online at www.sciencedirect.
com Current Opinion in
ScienceDirect
The importance of personal protective equipment in pesticide
applications in agriculture
Nigar Yarpuz-Bozdogan
Abstract
Pesticides are applied for protecting the quantity and quality of
agricultural crops. Yet, these chemicals may have side effects
on human health and the environment. To minimize pesticide
effects on human health, farmers have to use appropriate
personal protective equipment (PPE) in all stages of pesticide
handling. However, empirical and research data support that
farmers do not use PPE before, during, and after pesticide
application. Thus, farmers can often suffer from acute and
chronic poisoning by pesticides. Farmers have to be educated
about the importance of PPE in pesticide use. The national
authorities should provide up-to-date, accurate, and easy to
understand information in the training of farmers in the use of
PPE. This paper highlights the importance of PPE in pesticide
applications in agriculture.
Addresses
Vocational School of Technical Sciences, University of Cukurova,
01350 Adana, Turkey
Corresponding author: Yarpuz-Bozdogan, Nigar (nyarpuzbozdogan@
cu.edu.tr)
Current Opinion in Environmental Science & Health 2018, 4:1–4
This review comes from a themed issue on Pesticides in agriculture
Edited by Christos A. Damalas
For a complete overview see the Issue and the Editorial
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coesh.2018.02.001
2468-5844/© 2018 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords
Farmer, Agriculture, Pesticide exposure, Personal protective
equipment.
Introduction
Pesticides are widely used by farmers for high quality
and yield in the agricultural production. These chem-
icals can significantly improve quality and quantity of
agricultural crops, but due to increasing sensitivity for
environmental protection in recent years, different
methods of crop protection are also used against diseases
and pests. For example, cultural and biological methods
of pest control can decrease pesticide applications.
Nevertheless, in certain cases, the application of pesti-
cides against pests and diseases is rather inevitable.
In chemical crop protection, using pesticide overdose or
incorrect pesticide products may cause serious problems
www.sciencedirect.com
Environmental Science & Health
on human health and the environment [1,2]. Especially,
in these situations, operators’ health can be seriously
affected, since pesticides can cause chronic and acute
effects on human health [3]. Some of these impacts are
Parkinson’s disease, various types of cancer, skin al-
lergies, stomach pain, asthma, and others [4e14]. Thus,
pesticides have to be applied using appropriate spraying
methods to avoid negative effects on human health.
Mohanty et al. [15] reported that agricultural workers
should be educated regarding safe use of pesticides to
prevent health and environmental hazards. Pesticide
exposure in operators and workers can be minimized by
using personal protective equipment (PPE), such as
coveralls, headgear, gloves, protective eyewear, and
footwear that can prevent pesticide exposure [16]. In
this review, information is provided about the impor-
tance of PPE for people applying pesticides, with aiming
to raise awareness of using PPE.
Farmers’ exposure to pesticides
Farmers can be influenced by pesticides during trans-
port of pesticides and preparation of spray solution as
well as before, during or after pesticide application [17].
In particular, farmers can be affected by pesticides in
three different ways during pesticide use. These mainly
include oral exposure, dermal exposure, and exposure
via inhalation. Especially during spraying with fog (10e
30 mm) or aerosol (30e50 mm) small droplets, which are
suspended in the air, farmers have to use a mask [18]. If
farmers do not use mask, pesticide droplets about 1e
5 mm in diameter are accumulated in the lungs and the
breathing tube. Furthermore, small droplets (<1 mm)
are spread in the lower part of the lungs [19].
Operator exposure is defined as the exposure of people
who are primarily involved in pesticide applications [20].
About 97% of human exposure to pesticides during
spraying occurs through contact with the skin [21]. Dermal
exposure to pesticides is highly correlated with the manual
contact with pesticide-treated plants and it is believed to
be the major route of pesticide exposure during occupa-
tional use [22]. Almost 1.3 billion workers worldwide suffer
from occupational injuries from the use of pesticides and
are occupied in agriculture [23]. Every year, almost 17,000
workers in agriculture are under a lethal effect according to
the records of ILO (International Labor Organization) [1].
Operators can be directly exposed to the pesticide during
preparation of spray solution (mixing and loading pesti-
cides), during spraying or even after pesticide
Current Opinion in Environmental Science & Health 2018, 4:1–4
2 Pesticides in agriculture
application. For these reasons, pesticide exposure can be
considerably reduced by using PPE [20,24e33]. During
spraying pesticides, exposure occurs in operators’ head,
eyes, hands, lungs, legs, and feet. For minimizing this
exposure, operators should always wear PPE. Yarpuz-
Bozdogan and Bozdogan [34] indicated that PPE
decreased the maximum risk for workers by 32%, the
intermediate risk by 44%, and increased the chances of no
risk by 24%. In this study, it was concluded that PPE has
to be used for minimizing pesticide exposure in workers,
as it was found that PPE was important for workers in all
herbicide applications. In many countries, farmers do not
prefer to use PPE due to meteorological factors during
pesticide applications. In particular, operators in Turkey
are not using PPE due to the hot weather conditions.
PPE use and items
PPE can help operators avoid direct contact with pesti-
cides [18,35,36]. When mixing pesticides, the operators/
workers have to use gloves and eyewear. The efficiency of
a working coverall combined with PPE to protect oper-
ators against dermal exposure to plant protection prod-
ucts under field conditions was studied [37]. PPE can
reduce the risk of exposure to pesticide spraying, but the
use of PPE in small-scale farmers is very low [36].
Farmers should be protected against all risks with the use
of PPE during spraying. Operators’ exposure can be
considerably reduced by using personal PPE. Nicol and
Kennedy [38] reported discomfort, high expense and loss
of time as farmers’ reasons for not wearing PPE. Samual
et al. [39] reported that farmers in Nigeria did not use
PPE during herbicide applications. Okoffo et al. [31]
indicated that 20% of the farmers in Ghana did not use
PPE during pesticide applications. Ribeiro et al. [40]
reported that workers in greenhouses had higher risk of
pesticide exposure. Consequently, workers must use
PPE during pesticide application in the greenhouse.
Another problem about the use of PPE by farmers is the
inadequate education about pesticide application
methods. Saeed et al. [41] reported that the level of
knowledge of farmers about the adverse effects of pes-
ticides on human health in Pakistan increased with ed-
ucation and training. It was shown that diseases such as
skin allergies, stomach pain, asthma, and others can be
reduced by providing training on pesticide application to
the farmers and by using PPE during pesticide applica-
tion [42]. To reduce the adverse effects of pesticides on
human and environmental health, farmers should be
educated about the proper use of pesticides and pesti-
cide application methods [43]. PPE is categorized in five
groups. These are head protection, eye and face protec-
tion, body protection, respiratory protection, as well as
hand and foot protection, as described below.
Head protection
Hat
A waterproof hat should be used to protect the opera-
tors’ head against pesticides. It should be easy to clean.
Current Opinion in Environmental Science & Health 2018, 4:1–4
Eye and face protection
Face shields
Farmers should use face shields to avoid the negative
effects of pesticides when preparing pesticides as well as
during and after pesticide application.
Goggles
Eyes are the most sensitive part of the body. Eyes absorb
pesticide quickly and to a great extent. Farmers must
use goggles to be protected by spills or splashes that
happen during mixing and loading the pesticides.
Cargnin et al. [44] reported that 13.6% of tobacco
growers used goggles in Brazil. Farmers are obliged to
use gloves when pesticides are released into drug stor-
age. The use of gloves is recommended to minimize
pesticide exposure [19].
Body protection
Coveralls
It is recommended that operators use disposable or
washable coveralls during pesticide preparation, mixing
the tank, spraying and also during sprayer cleaning.
Because of the high prices of the coveralls that are
recommended for pesticide applications, different al-
ternatives are used instead of coveralls, such as long-
sleeved shirts, trousers, and aprons. In Korea, farmers
preferred long-sleeved shirts and trousers instead of
PPE during pesticide application [45]. Cargnin et al.
[44] reported that in Brazil, 81.5% of tobacco farmers
used coveralls.
Aprons
PVC aprons can be used as an alternative to coveralls.
The apron should be long enough to cover the chest and
the knees. The apron used during pouring pesticides at
any location must be immediately cleanable or washable.
Respiratory protection
Respirators
A respirator is a unit that covers the mouth and the nose
to prevent spray droplets of pesticide, small particles,
and vapors from getting into the lungs. During pesticide
application in the greenhouse, the operators are affected
by pesticides in the air. For this reason, farmers must use
a respirator in greenhouses. Generally, respirators are
divided into two classes. These are the atmosphere
supplying respirator and the air-purifying respirator
[21].
Hand and foot protection
Gloves
Hands almost always become contaminated when
handling and applying pesticides. Contaminated hands
with pesticides can often affect human health because
pesticides can be easily transferred to the eyes, the nose,
the mouth, and the face. For this reason, operators must
always use gloves in all pesticide applications. Gloves
must be waterproof or pesticide resistant. Suitable
www.sciencedirect.com
 The importance of personal protective equipment Yarpuz-Bozdogan
gloves may be made from neoprone, nitrile or PVC.
Acquavella et al. [46] indicated that 34% farmers used
rubber glove when mixing or loading pesticides.
Footwear
When operator walks into pesticide contaminated areas
during or after pesticide spraying, the feet can be
contaminated with pesticides. Yarpuz-Bozdogan et al.
[47] showed that the highest pesticide residues in the
greenhouse were found on operators’ knee and ankle in
pesticide application with a knapsack sprayer. According
to Nuyttens et al. [48] the lower the position of the
body is the higher the exposure is in greenhouse
spraying. Hence, farmers must use boots in all pesticide
applications. In hot climate regions, farmers often wear
sandals or slippers during pesticide applications, where
the feet are directly exposed to the pesticides. Farmers
must wear closed shoes or waterproof boots during
pesticide applications. Damalas and Abdollahzadeh [16]
reported that generally Greek farmers used hat and
boots in pesticide applications, but the majority of the
farmers reported low frequency of use for gloves, gog-
gles, face mask, coveralls, and respirator.
Cleaning of PPE
Cleaning and maintenance instructions from the PPE
manufacturer must be followed for reusable PPE. After
pesticide application, it is necessary to wash the trou-
sers, long-sleeved shirts, coveralls, aprons, gloves, hats,
glasses, and masks used in the PPE with soapy water in
the washing machine or with hand. Then they should be
rinsed with water. However, it is important that family
members wash their daily clothes separately from
pesticide clothes in the washing machine. After washing
PPE, the washing machine must run without clothes for
complete cleaning from pesticides [49,50]. For the next
use, the PPE should be kept clean ready. Also, if the
pesticide applications do not finish within a day, the
PPE must be washed at the end of the working day.
Otherwise, due to non-washed PPE, the next day the
operator can be exposed to pesticide through the skin
and the mouth. For this reason, it is necessary to pay
attention to the condition of the PPE to prevent
pesticide exposure of the operators.
Conclusion
PPE must be used to minimize the adverse effects of
pesticides on human health. The adverse effects of
pesticides cannot be completely eliminated by PPE, yet
the risk of human health can be largely reduced. Farmers
need to be aware of using PPE. Primarily, farmers should
be educated about the use of PPE in pesticide use. By
using appropriate PPE, health expense of farmers using
pesticides can be reduced. The national authorities
should provide up-to-date, accurate, and easy to un-
derstand information in the training of farmers in the
use of PPE.
www.sciencedirect.com
3
References
1. Palis FG, Flor RJ, Warburton H, Hossain M: Our farmers at risk:
behavior and belief system in pesticide safety. J Public Health
2006, 28:43–48.
2. Damalas CA, Eleftherohorinos IG: Pesticide exposure, safety
issues, and risk assessment indicators. Int J Environ Res
Public Health 2011, 8:1402–1419.
3. Recena MCP, Pires DX, Caldas ED: Acute poisoning with
pesticides in the state of Mato Grosso do Sul, Brazil. Sci Total
Environ 2006, 357:88–95.
4. Keifer MC, Firestone J: Neurotoxicity of pesticide. J Agromed
2007, 12:17–25.
5. Ye M, Beach J, Martin JW, Senthilselvan A: Occupational
pesticide exposure and respiratory health. Int J Environ Res
Public Health 2013, 10:6442–6471.
6. Fenga C: Occupational exposure and risk of breast cancer
(Review). Biomed Rep 2016, https://doi.org/10.3892/br.2016.575.
7. Furlong M, Tanner CM, Goldman SM, Bhudhikanok GS, Blair A,
Chade A, Comyns K, Hoppin JA, Kasten M, Korell M,
Langston JW, Marras C, Meng C, Ricahards M, Ross GW,
Umbach DM, Sandler DP, Kamel F: Protective glove use and
hygiene habits modify the associations of specific pesticides
with Parkinson’s disease. Environ Int 2015, 75:144–150.
8. Lerro C, Koutros S, Andreotti G, Hines CJ, Blair A, Lubin J, Ma X,
Zhang Y, Freeman LEB: Use of acetochlor and cancer inci-
dence in the agricultural health study. Int J Cancer 2015, 137:
1167–1175.
9. Knipe DW: Pesticide exposure in Sri Lanka. Int J Epidemiol
2016:327–332.
10. Sanchez-Santed F, Colomina MT, Hernandez EH: Organo-
phosphate pesticide exposure and neuro degeneration.
Cortex 2016, 74:417–426.
11. Bakhsh K, Ahmad N, Tabasuma S, Hassan S, Hassan I: Health
hazards and adoption of personal protective equipment
during cotton harvesting in Pakistan. Sci Total Environ 2017,
598:1058–1064.
12. Kim KH, Kabir E, Jahan SA: Exposure to pesticides and the
associated human health effects. Sci Total Environ 2017, 575:
525–535.
13. Hamsan H, Ho YB, Zaidon SZ, Hashim Z, Saari N, Karami A:
Occurrence of commonly used pesticides in personal air
samples and their associated health risk among paddy
farmers. Sci Total Environ 2017, 603–604:381–389.
14. Narayan S, Liew Z, Bronstein JM, Ritz B: Occupational pesti-
cide use and Parkinson’s disease in the Parkinson Environ-
ment Gene (PEG) study. Environ Int 2017, 107:266–273.
15. Mohanty MK, Behera BM, Jena SK, Srikanth S, Mogane C,
Samal S, Behera AA: Knowledge attitude and practice of
pesticide use among agricultural workers in Puducherry,
South India. J For Legal Med 2013, 20:1028–1031.
16. Damalas CA, Abdollahzadeh G: Farmers’ use of personal
protective equipment during handling of plant protection
products: determinants of implementation. Sci Total Environ
2016, 571:730–736.
17. Andrade-Rivas F, Rother HA: Chemical exposure reduction:
factors impacting on South African herbicide sprayers’ per-
sonal protective equipment compliance and high risk work
practices. Environ Res 2015, 142:34–45.
18. Matthews GA: Pesticide-health, safety and the environment.
Blackwell Publishing; 2006.
19. Lindquõst RK, Powell CC, Hall FR. In Glasshouse treatment.
Application technology for crop protection. Edited by
Matthews GA, Hislop EC, CAB International; 1993:275–290.
20. Chester G: Evaluation of agricultural worker exposure to, and
absorption of, pesticides. Ann Occup Hyg 1993, 37:509–524.
21. Fishel F: Personal protective equipment for working with pesti-
cides. Publication G1917. University of Missouri; 2000:6.
Current Opinion in Environmental Science & Health 2018, 4:1–4
4 Pesticides in agriculture
22. Jurewicz J, Hanke W, Sobala W, Ligocka D: Assessment of the
dermal exposure to azoxystrob in among women tending
cucumbers in selected Polish greenhouses after restricted
entry intervals expired- the role of the protective gloves. Int J
Occup Med Environ Health 2009, 22:261–267.
23. International Labour Office (ILO): Safety and health in agriculture.
SafeWork, programme on safety, health and the environment.
Switzerland: Labour Department International Labour Office;
2000:24.
24. Tuomainen A, Makinen M, Glass R, Kangas J: Potential expo-
sure to pesticides in Nordic greenhouses. Bull Environ Contam
Toxicol 2002, 69:342–349.
25. Nuyttens D, Windey S, Sonck B: Comparison of operator
exposure for five different greenhouse spraying applications.
J Agric Saf Health 2004, 10:187–195.
26. Royal Comission of Environmental Pollution (RCEP): Crop
spraying and the health of residents and bystander. RCEP; 2005:
176.
27. Bozdogan AM, Yarpuz-Bozdogan N: Determination of dermal
bystander exposure of malathion for different application
techniques. Fresenius Environ Bull 2008, 17:2103–2108.
28. Yarpuz-Bozdogan N, Bozdogan AM: Assessment of dermal
bystander exposure in pesticide applications using different
types of nozzles. J Food Agric Environ 2009, 7:678–682.
29. Mac Farlane E, Carey R, Keegel T, El-Zaemay S, Fritschi L:
Dermal exposure associated with occupational end use of
pesticides and the role of protective measures. Safety Health
Work 2013, 4:136–141.
30. Bozdogan AM: Assessment of total risk on non-target or-
ganisms in fungicide application for agricultural sustainabil-
ity. Sustainability 2014, 6:1046–1058.
31. Okoffo ED, Mensah M, Fosu-Mensah BY: Pesticides exposure
and the use of personal protective equipment by cocoa
farmers in Ghana. Environ Syst Res 2016, 5:17.
32. Yarpuz-Bozdogan N, Bozdogan AM, Daglioglu N, Erdem T:
Determination of dermal exposure of operator in greenhouse
spraying. Agricultural Mechanization in Asia, Africa, and Latin
America (AMA) 2017, 48:33–38.
33. Cao L, Cao C, Wang Y, Li X, Zhou Z, Li F, Yan X, Huang Q:
Visual determination of potential dermal and inhalation
exposure using allura red as an environmentally friendly
pesticide surrogate. ACS Sustain Chem Engin 2017, 5:
3882–3889.
34. Yarpuz-Bozdogan N, Bozdogan AM: Pesticide exposure risk on
occupational health in herbicide application. Fresenius Envi-
ron Bull 2016, 25:3720–3727.
35. Keifer MC: Effectiveness of interventions in reducing pesti-
cide over exposure and poisonings. Am J Prevent Med 2000,
18:80–89.
36. Sharifzadeh MS, Damalas CA, Abdollahzadeh G: Perceived
usefulness of personal protective equipment in pesticide use
predicts farmers’ willingness to use it. Sci Total Environ 2017,
609:517–523.
Current Opinion in Environmental Science & Health 2018, 4:1–4
37. Thouvenin I, Bouneb F, Mercier T: Operator dermal exposure
and protection provided by personal protective equipment
and working coveralls during mixing/loading, application and
sprayer cleaning in vineyards. Int J Occup Saf Ergon 2017, 23:
229–239.
38. Nicol AM, Kennedy SM: Assessment of pesticide exposure
control practice among men and women on fruit-growing
farms in British Columbia. J Occup Environ Hyg 2008, 5:
217–226.
39. Samual NK, Apiakise EW, Akpe BA, Obele RI: Knowledge,
attitude and practices of small scale farmers on pesticide
handling in Bayelsa State. Point J Med Med Res 2015, 1:55–59.
40. Ribeiro MG, Colasso CG, Monteiro PP, Filho WRP, Yonamine M:
Occupational safety and health practices among flower
greenhouses workers from Alto Tietêregion (Brazil). Sci Total
Environ 2012, 416:121–126.
41. Saeed MF, Shaheen M, Ahmad I, Zakir A, Nadeem M, Chishti AA,
Shahid M, Bakhsh K, Damalas CA: Pesticide exposure in the
local community of Vehari District in Pakistan: an assess-
ment of knowledge and residues in human blood. Sci Total
Environ 2017, 587–588:137–144.
42. Fortenberry GZ, Beckman J, Schwartz A, Prado JB, Graham LS,
Higgins S, Lackovic M, Mulay P, Bojes H, Waltz J, Mitchell Y,
Leinenkugel K, Oriel MS, Evans E, Calvert GM: Magnitude and
characteristics of acute paraquat- and diquat-related ill-
nesses in the US: 1998-2013. Environ Res 2016, 146:191–199.
43. Damalas CA, Khan M: Pesticide use in vegetable crops in
Pakistan: insights through an ordered probit model. Crop Prot
2017, 99:59–64.
44. Cargnin MCS, Echer EC, Silva DR: Tobacco farming: use of
personal protective equipment and pesticide poisoning. Rev
Fund Care Online 2017, 9:466–472.
45. Choi H, Moon JK, Liu KH, Park HW, Ihm YB, Park BS, Kim JH:
Risk assessment of human exposure to cypermethrin during
treatment of Mandarin fields. Arch Environ Contam Toxicol
2006, 50:437–442.
46. Acquavella JF, Alexander BH, Mandel JS, Gustin C, Baker B,
Chapman B, Bleeke M: Glyphosate biomonitoring for farmers
and their families: results from the farm family exposure
study. Environ Health Perspect 2004, 112:321–326.
47. Yarpuz-Bozdogan N, Bayat A, Ulubilir A: Determination of effi-
ciency of different types of spray application equipment in
greenhouses. 28. Symposium Actual Tasks on Agricultural En-
gineering Opatija-Hõrvatistan 2000:233–241.
48. Nuyttens D, Breakman P, Windey S, Sonck B: Potential dermal
pesticide exposure affected by greenhouse spray application
technique. Pest Manag Sci 2008, 65:781–790.
49. Johnson MP, Easter EP, Horstman SW: Personal protective
equipment for pesticide applicators. Cooperative Extension Ser-
vice, University of Kentucky, College of Agriculture; 2000:4.
50. Anonymous: Personal protective equipment under the current
WPS. EPA: Pesticides-Personal Protective Equipment. 2015.
http://www.epa.gov.
www.sciencedirect.com