China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Work stress induced psychological disorders in construction
Published in Imriyas Kamardeen, Work Stress Induced Chronic Diseases in Construction, 2021
Controlling psychosocial hazards in the workplace should follow the same system of hierarchy of control as applied in physical hazard control, which identifies the following hierarchical order of implementation: eliminating psychosocial hazardsminimising risk by applying substitution, isolation or engineering controls in work and workplace designadministrative control of psychosocial hazard through workplace behaviour policies, and procedures and training on stress managementpersonal protective equipment – examples are providing personal distress alarms, equipment to prevent stress caused by environmental factors such as noise or heat.
Standardizing an Assessment
Published in Lucy Jane Miller, Developing Norm-Referenced Standardized Tests, 2020
James Gyurke, Aurelio Prifitera
In order to make the data collection as manageable as possible, there should be an individual at each site who has administrative responsibility for the data collection. This can often be one of the examiners at a site. Centralized administrative control, especially with numerous sites, can become unwieldy and difficult to control. The coordinator might also be someone on site who has supervisory responsibility for the test administration and scoring.
Consumed in care
Published in Helen Macdonald, Ian Harper, Understanding Tuberculosis and Its Control, 2019
In India, a country which has the dubious distinction of ranking first in the world for its burden of tuberculosis burden, the potential risk to HCWs is enormous. An exceedingly high load of open cases (infectious) falls on the general healthcare facility. Delays in diagnosis and treatment occur routinely and prolong the infectious phase. Suboptimal treatment due to improper drug regimens, poor treatment adherence and limited drug availability further compound the problem. Notwithstanding this, it was only as recently as 2010, as a result of a media reported spurt in occurrence of drug resistant TB and threat to health care staff, that the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare launched the guidelines on airborne infection control with a special focus on TB (DGHS, 2010). The focus of the guideline was on administrative controls as the first line of defence against exposure, followed by engineering controls and lastly the use of personal respiratory protection amongst the HCWs.2
A review of construction workforce health challenges and strategies in extreme weather conditions
Published in International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, 2023
Sanjgna Karthick, Sharareh Kermanshachi, Apurva Pamidimukkala, Mostafa Namian
Planning is key to reducing health problems when workers are exposed to extreme heat for prolonged periods of time. Administrative controls will be implemented as the next level in the control hierarchy. One of the most effective solutions is establishing rest periods, which reduces the number of accidents that might occur, reduces boredom that occurs from performing repetitive activities, renews interest in tasks and improves productivity [45]. In general, providing a 15-min break after 120 min of work is effective, but it has been observed that shorter breaks in the morning and longer breaks in the afternoon most effectively reduce mental fatigue and emotional strain [87]. A strict restriction on alcohol consumption also reduces heat stress and dehydration [87]. Pollution control strategies should be adopted in the earliest stage of projects to prevent or mitigate the severity of respiratory issues that workers face due to heavy wind, sand and other fine particles in dry, hot and humid environments [87].
Evaluation of hearing protection device effectiveness for musicians
Published in International Journal of Audiology, 2023
Kathryn Crawford, Krista Willenbring, Faryle Nothwehr, Stephanie Fleckenstein, T. Renee Anthony
Control strategies are limited since the exposure is from music purposefully being generated, as opposed to traditional noise. Engineering controls providing too much sound reduction may affect tone quality and too little reduction will have no substantial effect on exposure. One study reviewing the effectiveness of physical control strategies in performance halls (e.g. use of risers and screens) concluded that such modifications were unlikely to substantially reduce sound exposures (Wenmaekers et al. 2017). Administrative controls limiting exposure (e.g. schedule adjustments) are also problematic as they may affect performance and livelihood. Personal protective equipment, such as hearing protection devices (HPDs), may reduce sound exposures without restricting the time spent performing and listening to music. Furthermore, since musicians frequently perform and teach in different locations, HPDs offer a way to reduce exposure in any environment. The main concern musicians have with wearing HPDs is that by reducing exposure, the very sounds they need to hear may also be blocked or distorted.
Cochrane corner: interventions to prevent hearing loss caused by noise at work
Published in International Journal of Audiology, 2020
Christopher G. Brennan-Jones, Karina F.M. Tao, Christina Tikka, Thais C. Morata
Answer (Morata): In practice (and from the studies we located), the provision of hearing protection devices (HPDs) is the most common approach to reduce noise exposure. But in the field of occupational health, a hierarchy of controls that prioritises controlling the source of exposures, is recommended for being less burdensome to workers and less dependent on behaviour than those involving HPDs. In some settings one cannot eliminate or relocate the noise source. In those instances, personal hearing protection becomes the necessary approach. But in the vast majority of cases, noise control via engineering or administrative controls is understood to be the strategy that would substantially reduce the risk of illness or injury. So why is it not more commonly adopted? Cost is usually the first argument presented against noise control. While retrofitting equipment and machinery to be less loud can be very costly, examples from industry showing that noise control can be a cost-effective primary preventive strategy can be found online (See http://www.safeinsound.us/winners.html) and https://www.osha.gov/dts/osta/otm/new_noise/ and (Morata & Meinke, 2016). Unfortunately, the evidence of the effectiveness of specific interventions or hearing loss prevention programmes that include several components is weak; there may be some preventive effect but it may not fully cancel out the effects of exposure. The available evidence makes it difficult to draw more definite conclusions.