Comparison of Methods for Pretreatment and Quantification of Bulk Asbestos Samples for Polarized Light Microscopy Analysis to Evaluate Asbestos-Containing Waste

This study aimed to compare sample pretreatment procedures for the identification and quantification of asbestos. The performance of visual estimation and point counting procedures for evaluating asbestos-containing waste was investigated, and the effect of analytical experience was studied. The eff...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Seunghon Ham, Sungho Hwang, Chungsik Yoon
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: MDPI AG 2019-11-01
Series:Sustainability
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/22/6440
id doaj-536509f5f9794107a977ee5da5171b7b
record_format Article
spelling doaj-536509f5f9794107a977ee5da5171b7b2020-11-25T02:21:20ZengMDPI AGSustainability2071-10502019-11-011122644010.3390/su11226440su11226440Comparison of Methods for Pretreatment and Quantification of Bulk Asbestos Samples for Polarized Light Microscopy Analysis to Evaluate Asbestos-Containing WasteSeunghon Ham0Sungho Hwang1Chungsik Yoon2Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Gil Medical Center, Gachon University College of Medicine, Incheon 21565, KoreaNational Cancer Control Institute, National Cancer Center, Goyang-si Gyeonggi-do 10408, KoreaInstitute of Health and Environment, Department of Environmental Health Sciences, Graduate School of Public Health, Seoul National University, 1 Gwanak-ro, Gwanak-gu, Seoul 08826, KoreaThis study aimed to compare sample pretreatment procedures for the identification and quantification of asbestos. The performance of visual estimation and point counting procedures for evaluating asbestos-containing waste was investigated, and the effect of analytical experience was studied. The efficacy of pretreatments for the identification and quantification of asbestos in various sample matrices was compared. To evaluate the effect of experience on analytical accuracy, three analysts with different analytical experiences were selected. There were significant differences in the quantitative analysis results obtained using different pretreatments. False negatives were reported when asbestos, especially amphiboles, were analyzed by a less-experienced analyst. Quantification via point counting and visual estimation resulted in differences in the asbestos content. The results of point counting were more accurate than those of visual estimation for all analysts, regardless of the asbestos type and concentration. Experience in asbestos analysis affected accuracy and precision. The findings show that pretreatment is an important factor in qualitative analysis. Appropriate pretreatments should be assigned based on the properties of the sample. For quantitative analysis, the accuracy of the results depends on the experience of the analyst. Until analysts are fully trained, all their analysis results should be checked by an experienced analyst. Point counting is an adequate quantitative method for analyzing samples with low concentrations.https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/22/6440asbestosanalysispolarized light microscopevisual estimationpoint countinglaboratoryasbestos-containing wastepretreatment
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Seunghon Ham
Sungho Hwang
Chungsik Yoon
spellingShingle Seunghon Ham
Sungho Hwang
Chungsik Yoon
Comparison of Methods for Pretreatment and Quantification of Bulk Asbestos Samples for Polarized Light Microscopy Analysis to Evaluate Asbestos-Containing Waste
Sustainability
asbestos
analysis
polarized light microscope
visual estimation
point counting
laboratory
asbestos-containing waste
pretreatment
author_facet Seunghon Ham
Sungho Hwang
Chungsik Yoon
author_sort Seunghon Ham
title Comparison of Methods for Pretreatment and Quantification of Bulk Asbestos Samples for Polarized Light Microscopy Analysis to Evaluate Asbestos-Containing Waste
title_short Comparison of Methods for Pretreatment and Quantification of Bulk Asbestos Samples for Polarized Light Microscopy Analysis to Evaluate Asbestos-Containing Waste
title_full Comparison of Methods for Pretreatment and Quantification of Bulk Asbestos Samples for Polarized Light Microscopy Analysis to Evaluate Asbestos-Containing Waste
title_fullStr Comparison of Methods for Pretreatment and Quantification of Bulk Asbestos Samples for Polarized Light Microscopy Analysis to Evaluate Asbestos-Containing Waste
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Methods for Pretreatment and Quantification of Bulk Asbestos Samples for Polarized Light Microscopy Analysis to Evaluate Asbestos-Containing Waste
title_sort comparison of methods for pretreatment and quantification of bulk asbestos samples for polarized light microscopy analysis to evaluate asbestos-containing waste
publisher MDPI AG
series Sustainability
issn 2071-1050
publishDate 2019-11-01
description This study aimed to compare sample pretreatment procedures for the identification and quantification of asbestos. The performance of visual estimation and point counting procedures for evaluating asbestos-containing waste was investigated, and the effect of analytical experience was studied. The efficacy of pretreatments for the identification and quantification of asbestos in various sample matrices was compared. To evaluate the effect of experience on analytical accuracy, three analysts with different analytical experiences were selected. There were significant differences in the quantitative analysis results obtained using different pretreatments. False negatives were reported when asbestos, especially amphiboles, were analyzed by a less-experienced analyst. Quantification via point counting and visual estimation resulted in differences in the asbestos content. The results of point counting were more accurate than those of visual estimation for all analysts, regardless of the asbestos type and concentration. Experience in asbestos analysis affected accuracy and precision. The findings show that pretreatment is an important factor in qualitative analysis. Appropriate pretreatments should be assigned based on the properties of the sample. For quantitative analysis, the accuracy of the results depends on the experience of the analyst. Until analysts are fully trained, all their analysis results should be checked by an experienced analyst. Point counting is an adequate quantitative method for analyzing samples with low concentrations.
topic asbestos
analysis
polarized light microscope
visual estimation
point counting
laboratory
asbestos-containing waste
pretreatment
url https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/11/22/6440
work_keys_str_mv AT seunghonham comparisonofmethodsforpretreatmentandquantificationofbulkasbestossamplesforpolarizedlightmicroscopyanalysistoevaluateasbestoscontainingwaste
AT sunghohwang comparisonofmethodsforpretreatmentandquantificationofbulkasbestossamplesforpolarizedlightmicroscopyanalysistoevaluateasbestoscontainingwaste
AT chungsikyoon comparisonofmethodsforpretreatmentandquantificationofbulkasbestossamplesforpolarizedlightmicroscopyanalysistoevaluateasbestoscontainingwaste
_version_ 1724867016698888192