Hygienic assessment of working conditions and health risk factors of cosmetologists

The profession of a cosmetologist, which every third resident of the country turns to, is one of the most in demand at the present time. There are no publications on the working conditions of cosmetologists.

The study aims to substantiate the professional risk factors for the health of cosmetologists.

The authors conducted the study on the bases of three cosmetology clinics in Volgograd. The researchers carried out measurements and assessments of working environment factors in accordance with the requirements of current regulatory documents.

It is shown that the parameters of the microclimate, illumination, and intensity of laser radiation corresponded to hygienic standards. The content of fine particles of PM₁₀ and PM_2.5 in the air of the cosmetologist's working area exceeded the maximum permissible concentrations by 6–11 times. A number of substances (ammonia, sulfur dioxide, hydrogen sulfide, methanethiol, ethanoic acid, and others) have a pronounced odor and cause numerous complaints from cosmetologists. Excess of the normalized maximum single concentration was noted for sulfur dioxide, ethanoic acid, ozone and methanethiol.

The total microbial contamination at the end of the working day exceeded the normalized value. Experts found a significant number of staphylococci (444 CFU/m³), including those with lecithinase activity, as well as fungi (320 CFU/m³).

The production risk factors for the health of cosmetologists are chemical and biological factors. The content of harmful chemical substances and pathogenic microorganisms in the air of the working area of doctors of this specialty exceeded hygienic standards (class of working conditions — 3.2), which necessitates preventive measures. It is necessary to continue studying the "intrusive odor" factor, which causes numerous complaints from cosmetologists, as well as determining the microbial contamination of the air in the work area by the level of actual contamination by microorganisms.

Ethics. This study did not require the conclusion of an Ethics Committee.

Contribution:
Latyshevskaya N.I.— concept, writing, editing;
Krainova I.Yu.— data collection and processing, writing text;
Shestopalova E.L.— research design, text writing;
Davydenko L.A. — editing, writing text;
Belyaeva A.V. — data collection and processing, writing text;
Rourua L.P.— data processing, editing.

Funding. The study had no funding.

Conflict of interests. The authors declare no conflict of interests.

Received: 24.12.2024 / Accepted: 04.02.2025 / Published: 05.03.2025

1. Zadionchenko E.V., Kazakova R.O. Demand for cosmetology procedures in accordance with psychological aspects of personality. Prikladnaya psikhologiya i pedagogika. 2019; 4(2): 11–26. https://doi.org/10.12737/article_5d1284224dea37.06601554 (in Russian).

2. Analysis of the cosmetology market in Russia in 2019-2023, forecast for 2024-2028. BusinesStat; 2024. (in Russian).

3. Pozdnyakova M.A., Krasilnikova O.N., Zhiltsova E.E. Medico-social and legal aspects of medical care in cosmetology. Nauka molodykh — Eruditio Juvenium. 2017; 4: 509–519 (in Russian).

4. Kolsanova A.A., Suslin S.A. Medical and organizational aspects of patient appeal to the cosmetology clinic. Sovremennyye problemy zdravookhraneniya i meditsinskoy statistiki. 2023; 1: 506–522 (in Russian).

5. Kubanov A.A., Kolsanova O.A., Suslin S.A., Chertukhina OB Problems of improving the organization of cosmetology care (review). Sovremennyye problemy zdravookhraneniya i meditsinskoy statistiki. 2022; 3: 540–561 (in Russian).

6. Suslin S.A., Kolsanova O.A. Modern problems of organization of medical care in the profile of "cosmetology". Sovremennyye problemy zdravookhraneniya i meditsinskoy statistiki. 2022; 5: 809-827. https://doi.org/10.24412/2312-2935-2022-5-809-827 (in Russian).

7. Pozdnyakova M.A., Krasilnikova O.N. Pattern of demand and cosmetology procedures in a specialized regional outpatient clinic. Klinicheskaya dermatologiya i venerologiya. 2019; 18(5): 539–546. https://doi.org/10.17116/klinderma201918051539 (in Russian).

8. Zagorodnov S.S., Mai I.V., Kokoulina A.A. Fine-disperse particles (PM2.5 and PM10) in the atmospheric air of a large industrial region: issues related to monitoring and standardization in suspended particles in industrial emissions. Gigiyena i sanitariya. 2019; 98(2): 142–147 (in Russian).

9. Egorova A.M., Lutsenko L.A., Fedorovich G.V., Sukhova A.V. Improvement of hygiene criteria for assessing the health risk of workers in dust professions. Mezhdunarodnyy zhurnal prikladnykh i fundamental'nykh issledovaniy. 2020; 10: 33–37 (in Russian).

10. Ielpo P., Paolillo V., de Gennaro G., Dambruoso P.R. PM10 and gaseous pollutants trends from air quality monitoring networks in Bari province: principal component analysis and absolute principal component scores on a two years and half data set. Chem. Cent. J. 2014; 8(1): 14. https://doi.org/10.1186/1752-153X-8-14

11. Aatamila M., Verkasalo P.K., Korhonen M.J. et al. Odour annoyance and physical symptoms among residents living near waste treatment centres. Environ Res. 2011; 111(1): 164–170. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2010.11.008

12. Piccardo M.T., Geretto M., Pulliero A., Izzotti A. Odor emissions: A public health concern for health risk perception. Environ Res. 2022; 204: 112121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2021.112121

13. Budarina O.V., Pinigin M.A., Yakovlev N.V. Quality of life of the population in the area of treatment facilities — sources of unpleasant odor. Vodosnabzheniye i sanitarnaya tekhnika. 2019; 7: 16–22 (in Russian).

14. Eykelbosh А., Maher R., Ferreyro Monticelli D. Elucidating the community health impacts of odours using citizen science and mobile monitoring. Environmental Health Review. 202l; 64(2): 24–27. https://doi.org/10.5864/d2021-010

15. Budarina O.V., Sabirova Z.F., Andryushin I.B., Shipulina Z.V. Hygienic justification for the classification of thr danger of sources of emissions of substances having an olfactorial action. Gigiyena i sanitariya. 2023; 102(9): 888–895. https://doi.org/10.47470/0016-9900-2023-102-9-888-895 (in Russian).

16. Searle T., Ali F.R., Al-Niaimi F. Surgical plume in dermatology: an insidious and often overlooked hazard. Clin Exp Dermatol. 2020; 45(7): 841–847. https://doi.org/10.1111/ced.14350

17. Ross E.V., Chuang G.S., Ortiz A.E., Davenport S.A. Airborne particulate concentration during laser hair removal: a comparison between cold sapphire with aqueous gel and cryogen skin cooling. Lasers Surg Med. 2018; 50(4): 280–283. https://doi.org/10.1002/lsm.22772

18. Khaldeeva E.V., Glushko N.I., Lisovskaya S.A. Assessment of mold infestation of conditioning devices and indoor air. Gigiyena i sanitariya. 2021; 100(7): 668–673. https://doi.org/10.47470/0016-9900-2021-100-7-668-673 (in Russian).

19. Shkarin V.V., Latyshevskaya N.I., Zamaraev V.S., Davydenko L.A., Belyaeva A.V., Zasyadkina A.V., Tarabanov V.M. Evaluation of efficiency of an innovative method for reducing microbial air contamination in auditoriums: part 1. Zdorov'ye naseleniya i sreda obitaniya. 2022; 30(7): 33–39. https://doi.org/10.35627/2219-5238/2022-30-7-33-39 (in Russian).