上海市某区建设项目职业病防护设施“三同时”调查

目的 通过调查上海市某区职业病防护设施"三同时"工作开展情况，找出政策执行存在问题，提出针对性的对策建议。
方法 抽样调查上海市某区2015-2018年应开展职业病防护设施"三同时"的60个项目，分析项目所属经济类型、行业类别、风险类别构成情况以及不同风险类别、投资类型项目职业病防护设施"三同时"不同阶段工作开展情况，不同风险类别项目、不同级别技术服务机构完成项目的技术服务报告质量情况等。
结果 调查的60个项目均开展了预评价，53个（88.3%）项目开展了防护设施设计，47个（81.0%）项目开展了控制效果评价，但仅有39个（67.2%）项目开展了竣工验收。从建设项目职业病危害风险分类上分析，防护设施设计、控制效果评价执行率上存在差异（P < 0.05），职业病危害风险越严重，执行情况越好；竣工验收执行率差异无统计学意义（P>0.05），均执行较差。不同投资类型项目防护设施设计、控制效果评价和竣工验收执行率差异无统计学意义（P>0.05）。不同风险类别项目、不同级别机构间报告质量差异无统计学意义（P>0.05），均存在一定的质量问题。
结论 职业健康监管部门应加强职业病防护设施"三同时"相关法律法规宣贯，对建设单位以及职业卫生技术服务机构"三同时"工作的事中事后予以监管，提高"三同时"工作执行率和执行质量，从而更好地防治职业病。

Investigation on tri -simultaneity of occupational -disease -prevention facilities of construction projects in a district of Shanghai

Objective The "tri-simultaneity" (design, building and use)work of occupational-disease -prevention facilities of construction projects in a district of Shanghai were investigated, to find out the problems in the implementation of policies, and to put forward corresponding countermeasures and suggestions. Methods A sampling survey was conducted on 60 construction projects, in which tri-simultaneity of occupational-disease-prevention facilities must be implement according to the national policy, in a district of Shanghai from 2015 to 2018. Their economic type, industry category and risk category, the status of work on design, building and use of occupational-disease-prevention facilities at different stages, and the quality of technical service reports of these construction projects were analyzed. Results Among 60 surveyed construction projects, the work on pre-evaluation of occupational hazards was done in all projects; protective facilities design was done in 53 projects (88.3%); the work on evaluation of control effect was done in 47 projects (81.0%); and work on acceptance of completed project was done in 39 projects (67.2%). The difference in the work on protective facilities design and evaluation of control effect were noted among construction projects with different risk classifications of occupational hazards (P < 0.05);and the higher the risk of occupational hazards, the better the implementation. It was noted that there was no difference of tri-simultaneity work among projects with different investment types (P>0.05). There was no difference in the implementation rate of completion acceptance (P>0.05), which was low. There were some quality problems of technical service reports, but no significant quality difference noted among projects with different risk categories or prepared by different institutions (P>0.05). Conclusion The occupational health supervision department should strengthen the publicity and implementation of relevant laws and regulations on the "tri-simultaneity" of occupational-disease-prevention facilities, supervise the construction units and the occupational health technical service institutions on this work, and improve the execution and quality, so as to better prevent from occupational diseases.