37个工业生产行业职业噪声暴露监测结果评价

目的对工业作业场所职业噪声暴露进行测量和评价。方法按《作业场所噪声测量规范》(WS／T69—1996)进行测点选择和测量噪声强度[dB(A)]，对噪声作业接触人员进行听力筛查，评价职业噪声暴露水平。结果平均噪声强度79[dB(A)]以下段7个行业(占18．92％)、80-84[dB(A)]段有24个行业(占64．86％)，85[dB(A)]段以上有6个行业(占16．22％)。4479个作业场所测量点声级段分布90[dB(A)]以上段占23．17％(n=1038)、85～89[dB(A)]段占25．50％(n=1142)、85[dB(A)]以下段占51．33％(n=2299)。同期接噪作业工人听力筛查4426人，听力损伤检出996人，听力损失筛查阳性检出率为22．50％。结论从危害程度和保护高危人群的角度考虑，严格执行85[dB(A)]噪声限值是适宜的，将来国家制定《工作场所职业噪声接触限值》时应对测量方法作配套规定。     

Task-based assessment of occupational vibration and noise exposures in forestry workers

Forty-two noise exposures and 164 whole-body (WBV) and hand-arm (HAV) vibration exposures were collected from 43 forestry workers in six trades employed by two forestry companies. Data were collected on 10 days over 8 weeks during various felling, logging, and log handling operations. Up to 5 volunteers were monitored for noise and vibration daily using datalogging noise dosimeters, which provided daily time-weighted averages (TWAs) and 1-min averages; and a precision sound level meter equipped to measure human vibration, which provided triaxial HAV and WBV event-weighted averages (AEQS). Workers completed a short questionnaire throughout the workday detailing the timing and number of tasks performed and equipment used. Substantial overexposures to noise and vibration were seen; for example, 60% of Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) TWAs and 83% of National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) noise TWAs exceeded 85 dBA, 33-53% of the axis-specific HAV AEQS exceeded the 8-hour American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists' HAV threshold limit value, and 34% of all summary weighted WBV AEQS exceeded the Commission of the European Communities' 8-hour exposure limit. The mean for 99 WBV summary weighted AEQ was 3.53 +/- 7.12 m/sec2, whereas the mean for 65 HAV summary weighted AEQ was 5.45 +/- 5.25 m/sec2. The mean OSHA TWA was 86.1 +/- 6.2 dBA, whereas the mean NIOSH TWA was 90.2 +/- 5.1 dBA. The task and tool with the highest exposure levels were unbelling chokers on landings and chain saws (noise), log processing and frontend loaders (WBV), and notching stumps and chain saws (HAV). An internal validation substudy indicated excellent agreement between worker-reported and researcher-documented tasks and tools.     

Simultaneous assessment of occupational exposures from multiple worker groups

The methods developed by Rappaport et al. [Ann. Occup. Hyg. 39 (1995) 469] and Lyles et al. [J. Agri. Bio. Environ. Stat. 2 (1997a) 64; Ann. Occup. Hyg. 41 (1997b) 63]) for assessing workplace exposures on a group-by-group basis are extended to allow for the simultaneous assessment of data from multiple worker groups within the same industry. These extended methods allow models to be fit simultaneously to data on all groups in a study, even when some of the groups might not contribute adequate information to be modeled separately. We assume that the exposures are log-normally distributed, and that they can be adequately modeled by a mixed effects regression model with parameters for exposure levels and for between- and within-worker variance components. Simultaneously analyzing data from multiple groups is only advantageous when at least one of these variance components can be assumed to be homogeneous across the groups. Here, we advocate testing an assumption of homogeneous within-worker variance components, sigma(2)(w,h), using a likelihood ratio test to choose between a full model (distinct sigma(2)(w,h) for each group) and a reduced model (common sigma(2)(w) across groups). We then develop a procedure, which is conditional on the results of the likelihood ratio test, for testing whether or not each group of workers is overexposed to the contaminant of interest. This modeling and testing procedure was applied to 39 different data sets, each containing data for multiple groups, from a wide variety of industries. For these data, the testing procedure generally resulted in the same conclusion regarding overexposure under both models, even in those data sets where the within-worker variance components appeared to be quite heterogeneous. We also conducted a small simulation study to estimate the significance level of the proposed testing procedure, and found that the significance levels tended to be adequately close to the specified nominal level when a likelihood ratio test with significance level of at least 0.01 was used as a preliminary test. Additionally, we make specific recommendations for designing studies and suggest a method for determining whether engineering and administrative controls or individual-level interventions would be of most benefit to an overexposed group of workers.     

An assessment of occupational noise exposure amongst bar staff employees working in night-clubs

This article describes a study conducted in 19 different night-clubs from four geographically different areas to obtain typical noise levels to which bar staff employees and other workers were likely to be exposed. The study involved the taking of continuous noise measurements from a fixed position in the bar areas of all 19 clubs and the monitoring of 20 bar staff employees at 16 of the night-clubs using personal noise dosimeters. Management and employees at the night-clubs were interviewed with regard to awareness about the risk of damage to hearing from noise and whether or not any action had been taken to assess the risk. The results showed that the daily personal noise exposure received by many of the bar staff exceeded the UK legal requirements. The bar area workstation noise levels indicated that action needed to be carried out by the employer to reduce the bar staff noise exposure. Most employers had taken no action to protect employees hearing at these establishments. Also most employees were ignorant of the possible risks to their hearing. It has been shown that for the average bar staff employee there is a minimal risk of hearing impairment over a typical working lifetime. However, for the worst case scenario there is a definite increased risk of hearing impairment.     

Surveillance of occupational noise exposures using OSHA's Integrated Management Information System

BACKGROUND: Exposure to noise has long been known to cause hearing loss, and is an ubiquitous problem in workplaces. Occupational noise exposures for industries stored in the Occupational Safety and Health Administration's (OSHA) Integrated Management Information System (IMIS) can be used to identify temporal and industrial trends of noise exposure to anticipate changes in rates of hearing loss. METHODS: The noise records in OSHA's IMIS database for 1979-1999 were extracted by major industry division and measurement criteria. The noise exposures were summarized by year, industry, and employment size. RESULTS: The majority of records are from Manufacturing and Services. Exposures in Manufacturing and Services have decreased during the period, except that PEL exposures measured by federal enforcement increased from 1995 to 1999. CONCLUSIONS: Noise exposures in manufacturing have been reduced since the late 1970s, except those documented by federal enforcement. Noise exposure data outside manufacturing is not well represented in IMIS.     

Exposure assessment in occupational epidemiology: measuring present exposures with an example of a study of occupational asthma

The aim of the present paper is to present a comprehensive review of the issues involved in exposure assessment for occupational epidemiology studies and to provide an example. Exposure assessment for occupational epidemiology studies is becoming more quantitatively refined. This paper discusses important issues that need to be taken into account for exposure assessment, with particular reference to occupational asthma. It discusses issues such as survey design, data collection, the effect of measurement error and data interpretation. It presents recently developed methodology to evaluate exposure variability and its effect on the attenuation of risk estimates. It also presents methodology to control for such variability. It uses examples from a recent cohort study of flour millers and bakers. This example shows various characteristics of exposure and demonstrates that various measures of exposure, such as peak and full-shift exposure measurements, are regularly correlated, which has consequences for the analyses of exposure-response relationships. This paper stresses the importance of the recognition and evaluation of exposure variability and its effect on risk estimates and shows that with different exposure grouping schemes, different health risk estimates can be obtained. Quantitative exposure assessment is generally difficult, time-consuming and expensive and many issues need to be taken into account, but it can be rewarding and has become an absolute necessity for many occupational epidemiology studies. Evaluation of components of exposure variance is absolutely necessary. Exposure variability could lead to serious attenuation of risk estimates. Received: 3 July 1996 / Accepted: 2 April 1997     

Assessment of occupational exposures in foundries

The working environment of foundries is hazardous and characterized by multiple simultaneous chemical and physical hazards exposure. In the present work, four foundries, namely; El Nasr Casting and Ramsis foundry in Alexandria and Misr Spinning and Weaving and Misr Rayon Companies in Kafr El-Dawar in Behira have been surveyed. Levels of total and respirable dust, free silica % in total dust and lead concentration in total and respirable dust; NO2, SO2 and CO concentrations; noise and heat stress levels have been determined in the present work utilizing recommended standard methods and direct reading calibrated instruments. The results of the present study revealed; 1. The levels of total dust and respirable dust taken at the four companies and at all operations are within threshold limit values, except at knockout and cleaning operation at El Nasr company. 2. Free silica concentration in total dust at all operations in all the companies are within threshold limit values, except at moulding, melting and knockout and cleaning operations in El Nasr Company. 3. Lead concentrations in total and respirable dust at melting and pouring in Misr Reyon Company are within threshold limit values. 4. Gases comprising NO2, SO2 and CO levels are within threshold limits in melting and pouring in all companies for the former two whereas CO levels in Misr spinning and weaving company are higher than threshold limit values. 5. Noise levels in knockout and cleaning operation at the four companies are exceeding threshold limit values. 6. Heat stress levels in melting and pouring operation in El Nasr and in pouring operation in Ramsis are higher than maximum allowable permissible levels. The present work is a massive survey, which highlights the occupational hazards in Egyptian foundries.     

两种职业健康风险评估方法在某啤酒制造企业噪声评估中的应用

目的 研究两种不同职业健康风险评估方法在某啤酒制造企业噪声岗位的适用性。方法 对武汉市某啤酒制造企业的工作场所进行职业卫生学调查和职业病危害因素检测,以噪声暴露岗位L_EX,8h≥80dB(A)的工人为研究对象,使用《噪声职业病危害风险管理指南》法和职业危害风险指数法对某啤酒制造企业噪声作业岗位进行风险评估,并比较两种方法的评估结果。结果 该企业噪声暴露水平在81.2～91.2dB(A)之间;指南法预测瓶装生产线灌酒工及贴标工在接触噪声35年后发生高频听损和噪声聋的风险为高风险,洗瓶、验瓶、装箱及听装生产线上瓶、灌酒工为中等风险,瓶装生产线做箱、堆垛及听装生产线装箱堆垛为低风险,职业危害风险指数法评估结果显示,瓶装生产线上瓶工、灌酒工、验酒工、贴标工及装箱工风险等级为中等风险,其他岗位为低风险。结论 职业危害风险指数法对影响健康风险的各要素考虑较为全面,评估结果与指南法较为接近;指南法能定量预测高频听损与噪声聋的风险,发生听力损失的风险随暴露年数增加而升高。     

对建设项目职业病危害评价中的若干问题思考

目的更好地开展建设项目的职业病危害评价工作。方法结合工作的实际，对目前开展职业病危害评价工作中存在的问题进行分析探讨并提出思考。结果虽然法律法规对建设项目职业病危害评价的方法等作了具体规定，但实际运作起来仍有不少困难和问题。结论建设项目职业病危害评价的法规应进一步充实、完善并加以修订，以提高其合理性和可操作性。     

建设项目职业病危害评价评审工作探讨

目的充分发挥专家在《建设项目职业病危害评价》、《建设项目职业病防护设施设计》时的技术审查作用,更好的保证职业卫生行政审查活动的公平、公正、公开。方法概述职业病危害评价及设计中评审过程的含义、作用、原则、方式、步骤,介绍评审职业病危害评价及设计书质量的方法、质量评审的技术要求,并对现实情况进行分析。结果通过对现行《建设项目职业病危害评价》、《建设项目职业病防护设施设计》专家评审的仔细分析和讨论,找出了在评审过程中在认识上、评审方式上、评审质量、评审内容、实际价值、规范性、专家结构等方面存在的主要问题。结论提出了比较切实可行的改进建议来保障专家评审活动的公平、公正性,提高评审质量。     

Measurement, evaluation, and assessment of occupational exposures to hand-transmitted vibration.

The measurement of hand-transmitted vibration converts oscillatory movements to a form in which they can be evaluated with respect to human responses and assessed for their acceptability. This paper presents methods of measurement, evaluation, and assessment currently advocated in standards and other forms of guidance. The degree to which the methods of evaluating different frequencies, directions, and durations of vibration affect the assessment of vibration on different tools is illustrated. With the frequency weighting currently used to allow for the effects of different frequencies there is little need to measure vibration at frequencies as high as 1000 Hz; this has significant implications to the design and evaluation of proposed antivibration devices, including gloves. Without the current frequency weighting, vibration at frequencies greater than 250 Hz can contribute to the magnitude of the vibration, but many common causes of injury from hand-transmitted vibration have their dominant components of vibration below 250 Hz. On many powered tools, although the dominant frequency of vibration is the same before and after frequency weighting, the reported magnitude of vibration is greatly affected by the frequency weighting. On tools with dominant low frequencies, their vibration is rated as being of far greater importance relative to other tools when considering frequency-weighted acceleration than when considering unweighted acceleration. It is shown that the effect of considering three axes of vibration as opposed to one axis has a greater effect on some tools than on others. The uncertainties and assumptions involved in the measurement, evaluation, and assessment of hand-transmitted vibration are reviewed. It is suggested that whereas current decisions on health and welfare should be based on current assessment methods, the measurement and evaluation of hand-transmitted vibration should involve the collection and reporting of data which allow other interpretations in the future.     

An exploratory study of noise exposures in educational and private dental clinics

Exposures to noise and resulting noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) are not well understood in the dental profession. Previous studies have focused primarily on practicing dental professionals, and have often evaluated hearing loss in the absence of adequate noise exposure assessment. This study was conducted to evaluate exposures among students and staff working in four clinics within a major U.S. university dental school, and to compare these exposures to those among dental professionals in a private general-practice clinic. We measured equivalent continuous average (L_EQ) noise exposure levels at 3.75-min intervals across a variety of procedures in the evaluated clinics, and also had participants complete a brief survey with questions on their experience and perceptions of noise exposure.

We collected 79 partial- or full-shift Time-Weighted Average (TWA) dosimetry measurements on 46 individuals. The mean 3.75-min interval L_EQ level was 63.6 ± 13.3 dBA, while the highest 3.75-min interval L_EQ was 103.5 dBA. Students from the dental school clinics had the highest variability in average exposure levels, while the pediatric clinic evaluated had the highest average and maximum exposures. Nearly 4% of standardized 8-hr TWA measurements exceeded the 85 dBA Recommended Exposure Limit established by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. Concerns about the potential effects of dental noise on participants' hearing were significantly correlated with metrics of TWA noise exposure, as well as variability of exposure (as assessed by the SD of the 3.75-min L_EQ levels). Our results suggest that dental students and staff may have some risk of developing noise-induced hearing loss, particularly in pediatric clinical settings.     

Self-reported occupational health hazards and measured exposures to airborne impurities and noise in shoe repair work

The authors identified occupational risk factors of shoe repairers and measured their exposures to organic solvents, dust, chromium, degradation products of synthetic shoe materials, and noise. Exposures were measured in 11 shops selected from the workplaces of 82 repairers who responded to a questionnaire about their work environments. The questions dealt with, e.g., chemicals used, work related diseases, perceived hazards in the environment, ventilation, and use of personal protective equipment. Solvent vapor concentration averaged 1.95 (range 0.01-13.2) times the occupational limit (OL) of the mixture during gluing, with higher levels in facilities with no mechanical ventilation. TWA concentrations of organic solvents averaged 0.34 (range 0.01-1.23) times OLs in the breathing-zone samples. Of all shoe repair shops in Finland, 30% had no mechanical ventilation. Concentrations of airborne particles were 0.07-1.01 mg/m3, and those of insoluble and hexavalent chromium 0.10-0.32 and 0.01-0.08 microg/m3, respectively, near roughing, scoring and finishing machines. Several polymer degradation products were present in the air during machining of shoes. Ventilation exchange rates in shops with natural ventilation were less than once/hour. The repairers' average exposure to noise was below 85 dB. They reported many work-related diseases such as rhinitis (prevalence 21%), musculoskeletal disorders (16%), and dermatitis (9%). Measured dust concentrations were low, but the shoe repairers considered dust to be the most common hazard.     

Assessing noise exposures in farm youths

OBJECTIVE: This exploratory study evaluated the feasibility of field exposure assessment methods to characterize the noise sources and levels that farm youths experience during a typical workday. METHODS: Detailed exposure assessments were performed with a sample of 10 farm youths working on Vermont dairy farms to characterize potential noise hazards typical in the farm setting. Personal and area noise measurements were taken using noise dosimeters. Information concerning work- and non-work-related noise exposure histories was collected via questionnaire. RESULTS: The average age was 15.5 years (SD 2.5, range 10-18). Youths started working at an average age of 8.4 years (SD 2.3, range 6-12) and during the summer months worked an average of 41.3 hours per week (SD 32.3, range 2-68). Two youths exceeded the OSHA action level, having eight-hour time-weighted averages of 95 dBA and 92 dBA, or alternatively, doses of 206% and 127%. (The OSHA action level for the hearing conservation amendment is an eight-hour time-weighted average of 85 dBA or a dose of 50%.) Participants exceeding the action level reported working with tractors, skid steers (Bobcats), and all-terrain vehicles and doing general barn work. Additional sources of noise exposure included a mechanical silo elevator, chain saw, and wood splitter. CONCLUSION: Two of the monitored subjects were overexposed to noise in their farm work. Youths may be exposed to noise levels that exceed adult OSHA hearing conservation amendment action level as part of their daily farm activities.     

Shortfalls in imputing sarcoidosis to occupational exposures

The cause of sarcoidosis remains elusive. Reports of elevated sarcoidosis incidence in New York City firefighters and World Trade Center disaster responders have been advanced to support a causal relationship. This inference is open to question due to methodological differences in assessing and computing sarcoidosis incidence in populations versus putative occupational exposures. The magnitude of the odds ratio (OR; ca. 1.5) of causal candidates in the ACCESS case‐control study of occupational and environmental exposures is sufficiently small that it might easily be attributable to confounders. Additionally, multiplicity of comparisons, difficulty in assembling a valid control population and the potential for recall bias critically limit causal inferences. A possible explanation for etiological elusiveness and multiplicity of elevated OR is that individuals with sarcoidosis, lacking components of efficient cellular immunity, respond with systemic granulomas to a variety of ubiquitous, frequently unidentifiable environmental antigens. Epidemiological methods for the identification of sarcoidosis causal candidates are potentially misleading and are unlikely to prove useful. Am. J. Ind. Med. 56:496–500, 2013. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

建设项目职业病危害评价方法探讨

建设项目职业病危害评价包括建设项目职业病危害预评价和危害控制效果评价，职业病危害预评价工作在我国开展的时间不长，评价方法没有固定的模式。该文分类综述了建设项目职业病危害评价方法的概念、应用范围、优、缺点以及职业病危害评价工作的方法选择原则。