• 한국산업보건학회지
• /
• 제27권3호
• /
• pp.149-162
• /
• 2017

Objectives: Six cases of non-oral occupational methanol poisoning were found in mobile phone parts manufacturers in South Korea during the period from 22 January 2016 to 5 October 2016. We conducted this study to determine the cause of the accident including social environment factor. Methods: We interviewed the cases. Based on that, we described this poisoning accident narratively and arranged the evolution of the accident in chronological order. We used the Haddon matrix method to investigate the cause of the accident. Results: It was found that six cases were all dispatched workers who were under poor working condition including working time exceeded 12 hours a day, not given basic occupational health and safety information etc. Occupational disease associated with dispatched work was difficult to be reported. 2 cases were not able to identify the cause of the disease within one year. Conclusions: In short, the direct cause of the poisoning accident was that workers were exposed to high concentration of methanol(over 1,000 ppm). One of the main fundamental cause is that dispatched worker is rampant in the supply chain of mobile phone production. To protect dispatched workers, appropriate occupational safety health measures are needed urgently.

• 대한임상독성학회지
• /
• 제21권2호
• /
• pp.143-150
• /
• 2023

Purpose: This study aimed to compare the clinical features of methanol and ethylene glycol poisoning. Methods: This single-center retrospective observational study included patients with toxic alcohol poisoning who visited a regional emergency medical center. Patients with methanol and ethylene glycol poisoning from January 2004 to June 2023 were selected for the study using diagnostic codes. Results: Twenty-two patients with toxic alcohol poisoning visited during the study period, with 11 patients for each category. Compared to methanol poisoning, ethylene glycol poisoning patients were more likely to have consumed alcohol for suicidal purposes (n=4 [36.36%] vs. n=8 [72.73%]) and were more likely to be drowsy (n=0 vs. n=6 [54.55%], p=0.016). The anion gap (25.43±8.35 mmol/L vs. 13.22±6.23 mmol/L, p=0.001) and lactic acid levels (1.785 [1.3-2.785] mmol/L vs. 9.90 [4.20-11.81] mmol/L, p=0.007) were higher in ethylene glycol poisoning patients than in methanol poisoning patients. Among alcohol dehydrogenase blockers, oral ethanol was administered to 10 patients (45.45%) (n=4 [36.36%] vs. n=6 [54.55%]), and intravenous ethanol was administered to six patients (n=4 [36.36%] vs. n=2 [18.18%]). Fomepizole was administered to two patients (9.09%) each, and renal replacement therapy was non-significantly more common in patients with ethylene glycol poisoning (n=8 [72.73%] vs. n=3 [27.27%], p=0.128). Three patients had delays in diagnosis and treatment, and while there were no fatalities, one patient was left with permanent vision damage. Conclusion: Because these are uncommon types of poisoning and the clinical presentation is difficult to recognize early, healthcare providers should be familiar with toxic alcohol types and screen for them to ensure proper diagnosis and treatment.