BIOSECURITY AS A COMPONENT OF OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY IN BIOCHEMICAL LABORATORIES
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31861/biosystems2025.01.078Keywords:
biosecurity, biochemical laboratory, occupational safety, biological risks, personal protective equipmentAbstract
This work presents a systematic analysis of the state of biosecurity as a key element of occupational safety in biochemical laboratories. Special attention is given to risk classification, assessment of hazardous factors, and identification of effective approaches to their management at national and international levels. The aim of the study was to systematize existing scientific data on biosecurity in biochemical laboratories and assess the main risks posed by various factors to personnel, as well as to determine effective risk management strategies.The study involved an analytical review of peer-reviewed scientific publications, official regulatory documents, international standards (International Organization for Standardization (ISO), World Health Organization (WHO), Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)), and Ukrainian legislation. Source searches were conducted through scientific databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar) and official government resources.It was established that biological agents pose the greatest threat to biochemical laboratory personnel, accounting for up to 60% of incidents leading to pathological conditions in staff. Chemical, physical, and psycho-emotional factors also have significant impacts, though to a lesser extent compared to biological risks. The study revealed several barriers to ensuring biosecurity in biochemical laboratories, including outdated regulatory frameworks, insufficient funding, limited staff training, and the absence of a unified incident monitoring system. A comparative analysis of national approaches with international practices identified structural differences and shortcomings in the implementation of biorisk management standards. Therefore, effective biosecurity management in biochemical laboratories requires a comprehensive approach encompassing technical, organizational, behavioral, sanitary-hygienic, and medical measures. Integration of Ukrainian legislation with international standards, implementation of systematic risk assessments, establishment of a centralized incident monitoring system, updating regulatory frameworks, and promoting a culture of biosecurity are essential.
References
1. Aspland, A. M., Douagi, I., Filby, A., Jellison, E. R., Martinez, L., Shinko, D., Smith, A. L., Tang, V. A., & Thornton, S. (2021). Biosafety during a pandemic: Shared resource laboratories rise to the challenge. Cytometry Part A, 99(1), 68–80. https://doi.org/10.1002/cyto.a.24280
2. Blacksell, S. D., Dhawan, S., Kusumoto, M., Le, K. K., Summermatter, K., O’Keefe, J., Kozlovac, J. P., Almuhairi, S. S., Sendow, I., Scheel, C. M., Ahumibe, A., Masuku, Z. M., Bennett, A. M., Kojima, K., Harper, D. R., & Hamilton, K. (2024). Laboratory-acquired infections and pathogen escapes worldwide between 2000 and 2021: A scoping review. Lancet Microbe, 5(2), e194–e202. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2666-5247(23)00319-1
3. Hogg, S. L., Carling, R. S., Cantley, N. W., Hamilton, G., Goddard, P., Aitkenhead, H., Barski, R., Collingwood, C., Moat, S. J., & Kemp, H. J. (2023). Cross-sectional audit assessing the quality of dried bloodspot specimens received by UK metabolic biochemistry laboratories for the biochemical monitoring of individuals with phenylketonuria. Annals of Clinical Biochemistry, 60(3), 208–211. https://doi.org/10.1177/00045632231156035
4. ISO 35001:2019(en) Biorisk management for laboratories and other related organisations. (2019). https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/ru/#iso:std:iso:35001:ed-1:v1:en
5. Keckler, M. S., Anderson, K., McAllister, S., Rasheed, J. K., & Noble-Wang, J. (2019). Development and implementation of evidence-based laboratory safety management tools for a public health laboratory. Safety Science, 117, 205–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2019.04.003
6. Killgore, W. D. S., Taylor, E. C., Cloonan, S. A., & Dailey, N. S. (2020). Psychological resilience during the COVID-19 lockdown. Psychiatry Research, 291, 113216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113216
7. Li, Y., Jiao, H., Zhang, H., Wang, X., Fu, Y., Wang, Q., Liu, H., Yong, Y. C., Guo, J., & Liu, J. (2024). Biosafety consideration of nanocellulose in biomedical applications: A review. International Journal of Biological Macromolecules, 265(Pt 1), 130900. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijbiomac.2024.130900
8. Peng, H., Bilal, M., & Iqbal, H. M. N. (2018). Improved biosafety and biosecurity measures and/or strategies to tackle laboratory-acquired infections and related risks. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 15(12), 2697. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15122697
9. Resnik, D. B. (2024). Biosafety, biosecurity, and bioethics. Monash Bioethics Review, 42(1), 137–167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40592-024-00204-3
10. Stankovic, S., & Santric Milicevic, M. (2022). Use of the WISN method to assess the health workforce requirements for the high-volume clinical biochemical laboratories. Human Resources for Health, 19(Suppl 1), 143. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12960-021-00686-w
11. Vandevelde, N. M., Vermeersch, P., Devreese, K. M. J., Vincent, M. F., Gulbis, B., Eyskens, F., Boemer, F., Gothot, A., Van Hoof, V. O., Bonroy, C., Stepman, H., Martens, G. A., Bossuyt, X., Roosens, L., Smet, J., Laeremans, H., Weets, I., Minon, J. M., Vernelen, K., Coucke, W., & Advisory Board of the Action 1 of the Belgian National Plan for Rare Diseases. (2021). Belgian rare diseases plan in clinical pathology: Identification of key biochemical diagnostic tests and establishment of reference laboratories and financing conditions. Orphanet Journal of Rare Diseases, 16(1), 89. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13023-021-01728-1
12. Zhang, W. R., Wang, K., Yin, L., Zhao, W. F., Xue, Q., Peng, M., Min, B. Q., Tian, Q., Leng, H. X., Du, J. L., Chang, H., Yang, Y., Li, W., Shangguan, F. F., Yan, T. Y., Dong, H. Q., Han, Y., Wang, Y. P., Cosci, F., & Wang, H. X. (2020). Mental health and psychosocial problems of medical health workers during the COVID-19 epidemic in China. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 89(4), 242–250. https://doi.org/10.1159/000507639
13. State Sanitary Norms and Rules 2.2.7.029-99 – Hygienic requirements for handling industrial waste and determining their hazard class to public health. (n.d.). https://online.budstandart.com/ua/catalog/doc-page?id_doc=47238
14. Law of Ukraine “On ensuring sanitary and epidemiological welfare of the population.” (n.d.). https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/4004-12#Text
15. Law of Ukraine “On protection of population from infectious diseases.” (n.d.). https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1645-14#Text
16. Law of Ukraine “On labor protection.” (n.d.). https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/2694-12#Text
17. Labor Code of Ukraine. (n.d.). https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/322-08#Text
18. Melnyk, V. H., & Hrynzovskyi, A. M. (2025). Laboratory personnel biosafety: Risks and readiness to respond to emergencies. Medical Science of Ukraine, 21(1), 45–54.
19. Order No. 1192 of September 11, 2012 – On approval of labor protection rules during work in chemical laboratories. (n.d.). https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/z1648-12#Text
20. Order of the Ministry of Health No. 26 of January 24, 2008 – On approval of state sanitary norms and rules “Organization of laboratory work when studying materials containing biological pathogenic agents of pathogenicity groups I-IV by molecular genetic methods.” (n.d.). https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/z0088-08#Text
