Occupational Health in the 1990s (original) (raw)
Related papers
PubMed, 1987
Data from the Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Questionnaire, part of the 1985 National Health Interview Survey, were used to report workers' perceptions of occupational risk in their present jobs. This information will be used to monitor progress between 1985 and 1990 toward achieving broad goals in health promotion and disease prevention. The proportions of currently employed persons who perceived exposure to health-endangering substances, work conditions, or risks of injuries were reported for age, race, sex, and occupation groups. Occupational groups were further characterized by the proportion of men and women who reported specific exposures (such as exposure to chemicals or to loud noise) and specific health consequences of exposure (such as risk of developing cancer or hearing impairment). Greater proportions of men than women reported perceived risk from exposure to health-endangering substances, work conditions, and injuries in their present job. Also, a greater proportion of workers perceived risk of injury in their present job than other occupational risk categories. The greatest proportions of perceived exposure to occupational risk were reported by farm operators and managers, police and firefighters, and by workers in forestry and fishing occupations. Among workers reporting perceived exposures, chemicals, noise, and risk of injuries from vehicles were cited by the greatest proportion of workers, as were such health consequences as lung and respiratory problems and hearing impairment. Data from this study may be used to target employment groups for health promotion or education and to develop indepth studies of specific occupational groups to reduce or prevent risk at the worksite.
occupational health hazards Final Annals.pdf
Background and Purpose: Healthcare workers are prone to occupational hazards. The study aims to identify the occupational health hazards among healthcare workers in the Philippines and its essential relevant developmental framework. This article evolved on the responses of participants on how they can improve strategies and barriers for healthcare workers to comply with Occupational Health and Safety (OSH). Methods: A qualitative study design in which 15 healthcare workers from nurses (4), pharmacists (3), medical technologies (4) and medical doctors (4) participated: two focus group of three to four participants each and eight in-depth interviews. The thematic sessions were identified, including occupational health and safety policy implementations, hazards experiences, barriers, and strategies for quality improvement for OSH. Focus groups and interviews using transcript-based analysis were identified relating to emerging themes on the challenges they had experienced while accessing provisions of OSH in their workplace. Results: Majority of the participants revealed the existence of policy on Occupational Health and Safety (provisions, guidelines and regulations on OHS from the government) and mentioned that there were limited OHS officers to supervise the healthcare workers in their workplace. Some have limited accessibility to the requirements of the implementation of OHS (free facemasks, gloves, disinfectants, machines, OSH staff, etc.) among healthcare workers, while the workload of the staff in the implementation of OHS in the workplace gradually increased. The results indicated that the respondents were knowledgeable in the implementation of OHS in the workplace, and that there was no existing ASEAN framework on the protection and promotion of the rights of healthcare workers in their workplace. Facilities need to improve health assessment, and to ensure constant evaluation of the existing laws for healthcare workers (quality assurance of existing policies) in their working areas. Direct access to OSH officers, occupational hazards education, emergency contact etc. must be improved. Adherence must be strengthened to fully comply with the OHS standards. Conclusion: The researchers inferred that issues and concerns regarding compliance on provisions of occupational health and safety among health care workers must be properly addressed through immediate monitoring and reevaluation of personnel in terms of their knowledge and practices in OHS. Barriers and challenges have been identified in the study that can lead to improved compliance among healthcare workers in regards to OHS.
Elsevier eBooks, 2008
Background This article provides an overview of the adverse health effects caused by exposure to safety and health hazards at work and briefly outlines approaches to reducing hazards to promote workplace safety and health, all of which will be explored in greater depth in other articles. Although work has inherent hazards, working is fundamentally positive. It provides food, clothing, and shelter, creates cities and transportation systems, and forms the basis for human civilization. Work shapes society and profoundly affects the person conducting it. To the extent that workers gain income and other benefits, accomplishment, and social engagement, they share in the positive aspects of work. However, benefits to the individual and to society must include the systematic development of hazard identification and intervention to prevent the illnesses, injuries, and loss of life that unfortunately continue to characterize this important human activity.
A Short History of Occupational Safety and Health in the United States
American Journal of Public Health, 2020
As this short history of occupational safety and health before and after establishment of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) clearly demonstrates, labor has always recognized perils in the workplace, and as a result, workers’ safety and health have played an essential part of the battles for shorter hours, higher wages, and better working conditions. OSHA’s history is an intimate part of a long struggle over the rights of working people to a safe and healthy workplace. In the early decades, strikes over working conditions multiplied. The New Deal profoundly increased the role of the federal government in the field of occupational safety and health. In the 1960s, unions helped mobilize hundreds of thousands of workers and their unions to push for federal legislation that ultimately resulted in the passage of the Mine Safety and Health Act of 1969 and the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970. From the 1970s onward, industry developed a variety of tactics to undercut OSHA. Industry argued over what constituted good science, shifted the debate from health to economic costs, and challenged all statements considered damaging.
Introduction: Occupational Health and Safety
2018
COURSE DESCRIPTION This class will provide a survey of the major concepts and issues in occupational health and safety practice. Class participants will develop a conceptual framework for applying course content and public health principles to worker populations across industries to facilitate knowledge of occupational exposures, health outcomes and risk management approaches. Work-related hazards will be described in terms of recognition, evaluation and control. The course relies on a synthesis of knowledge from the behavioral sciences, occupational medicine and nursing, industrial hygiene, injury prevention and safety, toxicology and epidemiology and will be applied to program development and management. Students will participate in a site visit to a manufacturing plant.
On Future Occupational Safety and Health Challenges
International Journal of Occupational and Environmental Safety
Occupational safety and health (OSH) have constantly changed and evolved throughout the industrial revolutions and in recent years. The aim of this systematic literature review was to give an overview of future OSH challenges in industrialized countries. A search within the Scopus database returned 31 peer-reviewed journal articles published since 2014 on new and emerging OSH risks and challenges in the future. A review of articles identified future overall OSH challenges, OSH challenges caused by climate change, and OSH challenges related to sustainable development and responsibility. In addition, branch-specific challenges in industries and health care were determined. Individual employees can experience a wide range of OSH challenges from heat stress to poison absorption, musculoskeletal disorders, increased psychosocial load, ergonomic issues, and unexpected accidents and injuries. OSH management is discussed and future studies proposed.
New vistal in occupational health
Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 1997
Health contains a commendable review on national development in occupational health and safety by Edward A Emmett (1). It is based on observations of central trends and experiences in Australia. The review describes developments relevant to occupational health and raises a whole range of issues that is clearly pertinent in a global perspective. The paper carries a distinct Australian flavor, giving ample reference to legislation and regulations adopted in the occupational health field in Australia. Still, most of the observations are strikingly relevant and valid also in other parts of the world. For northern European readers in particularbeing myself one of them-it is easy to follow the direction of change and the description of pitfalls encountered in route. The volume constraints on an editorial column imposes limitations on commenting on all the complex issues involved in these changing horizons of occupational health. Therefore, a selection of a few points for discussion will have to suffice. The historical perspective given by Emmettin the form of a description of the phase referred to as the "classical"-is valuable. In Australia the duration of this phase wasin broad terms-from the 1890s to 1980. For an understanding of what is happening in the present, a scrutiny of the past is often necessary, and it often provides cues for the future. Emmett describes the strategies of regulations, specific preventive interventions, statistics, information, teaching, and research as the core elements of a comprehensive approach implemented on the national level during the period referred to as "moderntraditional", which extended roughly over the 1980s. At the end of this phase, the whole agenda came under close scrutiny in the face of the tightening economy and the increasing general awareness of a need to rethink the priorities, objectives, and values of good occupational health care. It was realized that occupational health was not just there, free for the taking. This realization gave birth to the present, ongoing stage referred to by Emmett as the "occupational health and safety performance phase". The forces propelling this transition were primarily the sharpening competition among enterprises in the global marketplace, the disaffection with some major economic blunders by the political leadership at the time, an increasing reliance on market forces in bringing about desired changes in the labor market and enterprises, the decentralization of decision making, and, in some quarters, enthusiasm for general deregulation. The bottom line of all these trends added up to a new political climate that carried implications for occupational health and safety, starting in the early 1990s. Emmett makes a well argued point in referring to this change as a new paradigm. These changes raise, by implication, issues of fundamental importance, such as the role of state agencies in promulgating new regulations and standards and inspecting their implementation. They also bring into focus, once again, a new awareness of the importance of actions at the enterprise level. The difficulties of regulatory agencies are simply enormous in keeping an even pace with developments in a dynamically evolving world with the corollary of necessary adaptations on national and enterprise levels with a view to an adequate output of regulations and guidance for implementation. All this change occurs in a context of sharpening competition and specialization. The market rules and cash is king. We have seen the same trends in Europe. I would add the changing panorama of workplace hazards to the aspects highlighted by Emmett. We see fewer chemical and physical hazards. We pay, at the same time, more attention to psychological, social, and cultural factors or health determinants operating at work. There is less occupational disease-setting aside, for the moment, the legal connotations of this termand more illness and sickness.