Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Bases de dados
País/Região como assunto
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
S Afr J Commun Disord ; 70(1): e1-e9, 2023 Nov 28.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38044863

RESUMO

BACKGROUND:  The South African Noise Induced Hearing Loss (NIHL) Regulations, mandates employers to conduct a noise risk assessment, which records specific variables for determining the status of exposure and the need for implementation of control measures. OBJECTIVES:  The study evaluated company noise risk assessment practices for alignment with legal requirements and specific risk assessment guidelines. METHOD:  Convenience sampling was used to select the four manufacturing and utilities companies that participated in the study. The participating companies submitted latest noise risk assessment records for evaluation through the READ approach. RESULTS:  The noise risk assessment records of three of the four companies omitted the recording of factors such as the reasonable deterioration in or failure of control measures, adequate control and formalisation of hearing conservation programmes (HCPs). When evaluated against the South African National Standard 31000 Risk Assessment guidelines, the risk assessment processes of the respective companies were lacking in addressing aspects related to establishing communication and consultation, evaluation, adapting, continually improving, leadership and commitment, and integration. CONCLUSION:  The recorded information on the noise risk assessment reports from the four participating companies were incomplete, negatively affecting subsequent HCP management processes and decision-making. Future studies should investigate other aspects such as the implementation status of recommended noise controls as well as their effectiveness as recorded in the noise risk assessment records.Contribution: This study provided firsthand insights of company noise risk assessment practices, specifically identifying functional and technical areas requiring improvement to enhance current efforts directed towards the minimisation of NIHL within HCPs. The study highlighted that the current practices on recording noise risk assessment information remain incomplete, adversely diminishing the impact of the assessment as an important decision-making tool. The identified technical issues specifically, when addressed, will increase trust on the decisions derived from noise risk assessments.


Assuntos
Perda Auditiva Provocada por Ruído , Doenças Profissionais , Humanos , África do Sul , Doenças Profissionais/diagnóstico , Doenças Profissionais/prevenção & controle , Ruído , Perda Auditiva Provocada por Ruído/diagnóstico , Perda Auditiva Provocada por Ruído/etiologia , Perda Auditiva Provocada por Ruído/prevenção & controle , Medição de Risco
2.
Ann Work Expo Health ; 67(4): 448-461, 2023 04 21.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36719046

RESUMO

The Occupational Health and Safety Act 1993 and its attending Regulations in South Africa, require employers to conduct cost analysis studies to inform decision-making related to exposure control for occupational health hazard such as noise. Cost analysis, as per South African National Standard/ISO 31000 risk assessment guideline, is an important input for the decision-making process of the risk management process. The costs of administrating a hearing conservation programme intended to minimise noise-induced hearing loss is an example of a cost analysis. This study enrolled four companies from the South African manufacturing and utilities sectors with the aim of establishing whether cost analysis is included during the noise risk assessment process; and determining administration costs of HCP administration. A HCP cost questionnaire was completed by each company's occupational hygiene professionals and risk officers. None of the companies in the study included cost analysis in their respective risk assessment processes. The overall costs, derived from the HCP cost item questionnaire, was much greater for Company A (4 290 014 Rands) than all of the other companies combined (970 685 Rands). Hearing protection device expenditures across the four companies were the greatest expense, while audiometry was the smallest expense owing to service internalisation. The HCP expenditures are incurred on periodic basis, yearly or biennial, and are internalised in companies as direct costs. Cost analysis can enhance the noise risk assessment process by providing additional input to support the decision-making process related to noise control. This challenges the occupational hygiene profession to pursue new frontiers and decision-making models in the scope of noise risk management, beyond noise measurements and hearing protection device use recommendation.


Assuntos
Ruído Ocupacional , Doenças Profissionais , Exposição Ocupacional , Humanos , África do Sul , Doenças Profissionais/prevenção & controle , Ruído Ocupacional/prevenção & controle , Exposição Ocupacional/prevenção & controle , Dispositivos de Proteção das Orelhas , Audição
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA