摘要
目的建立适用于职业性接触锂人群健康监护的常规检查方法。方法使用原子吸收光谱法和火焰发射光谱法测定血清锂和尿锂离子浓度，同时进行方法学评价。结果原子吸收光谱法和火焰发射光谱法对锂的测定受硝酸的影响较小；原子吸收光谱法的线性浓度为0．0～8．0mg／L，r=0．9961；火焰发射光谱法线性浓度范围为0．0～2．0mg／L，r=0．9966，且火焰发射光谱法的灵敏度比原子吸收光谱法高1倍；检出限：原子吸收光谱法为0．0039mg／L，火焰发射光谱法的为0．00066mg／L；两种方法检测血清锂和尿锂的相对标准偏差均在10％以下；准确度除原子吸收光谱法血清锂回收率（77．4％～87．8％）较低外，原子吸收光谱法尿锂、火焰发射光谱法血清锂和尿锂的回收率均值均为95％～100．5％。结论火焰发射光谱法能够应用于职业性接触锂人群血清锂和尿锂测定。
Objective To analyze and compare the application of AAS and FES in determination of blood and urine lithium in the occupationally exposed population. Methods Concentrations of blood and urine lithium were determined byAAS and FES, both methods were evaluated through comparison of the indicators such as the linear range, the lowest detection limit, the precision, and the recovery rate. Results Both methods were less interfered by nitric acid. The linear range of AAS was 0.0-8. 0 mg/L, r=0. 9961; that of FES was 0.0-2.0 mg/L, r= 0. 9966. The sensitivity of FES was doubled that of AAS. The lowest detection limit of AAS was 0. 0039 mg/L; that of FES was 0. 000 66 mg/L. Relative standard deviation RSD of both methods was〈10% in determination of blood lithium as well as in urine lithium. The recovery rates of AAS in determination of urine lithium and FES in determination of blood and urine lithium were 95%-100.5% except that the recovery rate of AAS in blood lithium determination was only 77.4% - 87.8%. Conclusions FES can be used in determination of blood and urine lithium in occupationally exposed population.
出处
《工业卫生与职业病》
CAS
CSCD
北大核心
2010年第1期16-19,共4页
Industrial Health and Occupational Diseases
