Samira Rahimnejad; Majid Motamedzadeh; Razzagh Rahimpoor
Volume 22, Issue 3 , May and June 2015, , Pages 246-255
Abstract
Background and purpose: The Upper Limb Disorders (ULDs) are the most prevalent types of occupational injuries, which appear following long exposure to ergonomics factors with specific repetition. The present study was aimed at assessing the upper limb disorders among assembly lines workers using Health ...
Read More
Background and purpose: The Upper Limb Disorders (ULDs) are the most prevalent types of occupational injuries, which appear following long exposure to ergonomics factors with specific repetition. The present study was aimed at assessing the upper limb disorders among assembly lines workers using Health and Safety Executive (HSE) method and and also evaluating it's correlation with sense of pain in gas control company of Iran.
Material and Methods: This cross sectional analytical study was carried out on 40 assembly workers. In order to evaluate the ULDs, study was began by using Risk Factor and accurate assessment HSE questionnaires, then thequantitative indicator Body Map was used for measuring workers pain sense. The collected data was analyzed by SPSS16.
Results: The measured quantities of risk factor of repetition, working postures arm and shoulder, head and neck and fingers, hand and wrist were 92.5%, 72.5%, 50.0% and 45.0% respectively. Work history and gender were significantly related with most disorders (P-Value= 0.022 and 0.001 respectively). The best correlation coefficient was between postures arm and shoulder, postures hand and wrist, repetition with hand and shoulder pain level(R= 0.62, 0.67, 0.74 and 0.72 respectively).
Conclusion: Prevalence of the ULDs among assembly workers was high. Considering the low age and work history level of workers, an increase in ULDs signs intensity is predicted in the not too distant future.
Samira Rahimnejad; Abdorrahman Bahrami; Mohammadjavad Asari; Alireza Soltaniyeh; Razagh Rahimpoor; Seyyed Amirreza Negahban; Farshid Ghorbani shahna
Volume 21, Issue 5 , September and October 2014, , Pages 829-841
Abstract
Abstract
Background and Purpose: Personal exposure to volatile organic compounds can cause variety of adverse health effects, containing a large range from non-cancer effects up to cancer. The purpose of this study was quantitative risk assessment of occupational exposure to Volatile Organic Compounds ...
Read More
Abstract
Background and Purpose: Personal exposure to volatile organic compounds can cause variety of adverse health effects, containing a large range from non-cancer effects up to cancer. The purpose of this study was quantitative risk assessment of occupational exposure to Volatile Organic Compounds in the oil-dependent chemical industry.
Materials and Methods: In this cross sectional study NIOSH 1501& 2549 methods were applied for sampling and analyzing the amount of hydrocarbons in the oil-dependents of chemical and after detecting hydrocarbons, the quantitative risk assessment was calculated by United States Environmental Protection Agency method. Also the Hazard Quotient parameter for non-cancer VOCs and Life time Cancer Risk for cancer VOCs were calculated. The collected data were analyzed by SPSS16 software.
Results: The Life time Cancer Risk (LCR) of benzene for 13complexes were Definite and for 8 complexes, in all complexes that have been studied, the LCR of benzene were more than threshold limit recommended by WHO. The Lifetime Cancer risk of trichloroethylene in one complex and ethyl benzene in two complexes were Definite. The Hazard Quotient of xylene, chlorobenzene, methyl ethyl ketone and N-hexane in several complexes were more than values recommended by WHO. There are significant relationships between carcinogenic hydrocarbons risk and parameters like age and work history, with the correlation coefficient of 0.336 and 0.409 respectively (P< 0.001).
Conclusion: This method ofrisk assessment is comprehensive and achieved results can be used for correcting and controlling prioritization of resources in case of reducing the level of risk.