Display options
Share it on

J Environ Health Sci Eng. 2021 May 05;19(1):1047-1055. doi: 10.1007/s40201-021-00671-4. eCollection 2021 Jun.

Deterministic and probabilistic human health risk assessment approach of exposure to heavy metals in drinking water sources: A case study of a semi-arid region in the west of Iran.

Journal of environmental health science & engineering

Reza Shokoohi, Mohammad Khazaei, Manoochehr Karami, Abdolmotaleb Seid-Mohammadi, Hassan Khotanlou, Nima Berijani, Zahra Torkshavand

Affiliations

  1. Department of Environmental Health Engineering, School of Public Health and Research Center for Health Sciences, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran.
  2. Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran.
  3. Department of Computer Engineering, Bu-Ali Sina University, Hamadan, Iran.
  4. Occupational Medicine Specialist, Sepehr Occupational Medicine Center, Hamadan, Iran.

PMID: 34150293 PMCID: PMC8172687 DOI: 10.1007/s40201-021-00671-4

Abstract

In the current study, the concentration of heavy metals (Ba, Mn, Pb, and Cd) in drinking water resources of 328 villages in Hamadan Province were measured using ICP-OES apparatus during two dry (September 2018) and wet (April 2019) seasons. The assessment of the non-carcinogenic risk of selected heavy metals was conducted based on the recommendations of the USEPA. Also, sensitivity analysis and uncertainty of the effective variables were performed using Monte-Carlo simulations. Based on the results, Mn level in drinking water samples ranged 0.08-25.63 μg/L and 0.08-20.03 μg/L in dry and wet seasons, respectively. Similarly, Ba levels in water samples ranged 0.15-70.13 μg/L and 0.84-65 μg/L. Also, Cd and Pb concentrations in all sampling sites were below the limits of detection (LOD) of the ICP-OES apparatus. The hazard index (HI) values for adult and children were 2.17 × 10

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021.

Keywords: Hamadan Province; Heavy metals; Non-carcinogenic risk; Sensitivity analysis

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of interestThe authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Environ Monit Assess. 2016 May;188(5):286 - PubMed
  2. Environ Pollut. 2019 Jul;250:820-830 - PubMed
  3. J Environ Health Sci Eng. 2020 May 6;18(2):515-529 - PubMed
  4. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2017 Nov;24(32):24790-24802 - PubMed
  5. Biol Trace Elem Res. 2019 Dec;192(2):106-115 - PubMed
  6. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2018 Nov 30;164:181-188 - PubMed
  7. Chemosphere. 2019 Aug;228:1-8 - PubMed
  8. Environ Monit Assess. 2015 Mar;187(3):63 - PubMed
  9. Environ Pollut. 2020 Jan;256:113324 - PubMed
  10. Environ Geochem Health. 2019 Apr;41(2):981-1002 - PubMed
  11. Environ Pollut. 2020 Apr;259:113711 - PubMed
  12. Environ Monit Assess. 2015 Jul;187(7):397 - PubMed
  13. J Environ Manage. 2019 May 1;237:163-169 - PubMed
  14. Int J Environ Health Res. 2020 Aug;30(4):447-460 - PubMed
  15. Chemosphere. 2017 Jul;179:167-178 - PubMed
  16. Reprod Toxicol. 2008 Aug;25(4):413-9 - PubMed
  17. J Environ Health Sci Eng. 2019 Dec 20;17(2):1163-1169 - PubMed
  18. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2020 Feb;189:110038 - PubMed
  19. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 2021 Mar 15;211:111939 - PubMed
  20. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2020 Nov;27(32):39852-39864 - PubMed

Publication Types