"Why should care workers be any different from prison workers?" A qualitative study of second-hand smoke exposure during home-care visits and potential measures to eliminate exposure.

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Annals Of Work Exposures and Health Pub Date : 2024-11-25 DOI:10.1093/annweh/wxae069
Rachel O'Donnell, Ruaraidh Dobson, Sean Semple
{"title":"\"Why should care workers be any different from prison workers?\" A qualitative study of second-hand smoke exposure during home-care visits and potential measures to eliminate exposure.","authors":"Rachel O'Donnell, Ruaraidh Dobson, Sean Semple","doi":"10.1093/annweh/wxae069","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Despite world-leading measures in place to protect employees from second-hand smoke exposure in workplaces in the United Kingdom, workers who deliver health and social care in private homes remain unprotected legally in this setting from second-hand smoke exposure (SHS).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Fourteen individuals took part in either an in-depth telephone interview (n = 11) or an online focus group discussion (n = 3), including home-care workers (n = 5) and managers (n = 5) based in Lanarkshire (Scotland) and local/national policy makers (n = 4). Participants were asked about the extent to which exposure to SHS is an issue during home visits and possible additional measures that could be put in place to eliminate exposure.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants highlighted the difficulties in balancing the provision of care in a person's own home with the right of workers to be able to breathe clean air and be protected from SHS. Current strategies to reduce staff exposure to SHS during home visits were often reported as inadequate with SHS not a hazard considered by managers beyond protecting pregnant staff or those with pre-existing respiratory conditions such as asthma. Simple respiratory protective equipment (as used during the COVID-19 pandemic) was rightly identified as being ineffective. Methods such as nicotine replacement therapy and e-cigarettes were identified as potential ways to help people who smoke achieve temporary asbstinence prior to a home visit.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Implementing appropriate and proportionate measures to protect home-care workers from the harms posed by SHS should be a priority to help protect the health of this often overlooked occupational group.</p>","PeriodicalId":8362,"journal":{"name":"Annals Of Work Exposures and Health","volume":" ","pages":"999-1003"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11586273/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals Of Work Exposures and Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/annweh/wxae069","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Despite world-leading measures in place to protect employees from second-hand smoke exposure in workplaces in the United Kingdom, workers who deliver health and social care in private homes remain unprotected legally in this setting from second-hand smoke exposure (SHS).

Methods: Fourteen individuals took part in either an in-depth telephone interview (n = 11) or an online focus group discussion (n = 3), including home-care workers (n = 5) and managers (n = 5) based in Lanarkshire (Scotland) and local/national policy makers (n = 4). Participants were asked about the extent to which exposure to SHS is an issue during home visits and possible additional measures that could be put in place to eliminate exposure.

Results: Participants highlighted the difficulties in balancing the provision of care in a person's own home with the right of workers to be able to breathe clean air and be protected from SHS. Current strategies to reduce staff exposure to SHS during home visits were often reported as inadequate with SHS not a hazard considered by managers beyond protecting pregnant staff or those with pre-existing respiratory conditions such as asthma. Simple respiratory protective equipment (as used during the COVID-19 pandemic) was rightly identified as being ineffective. Methods such as nicotine replacement therapy and e-cigarettes were identified as potential ways to help people who smoke achieve temporary asbstinence prior to a home visit.

Conclusion: Implementing appropriate and proportionate measures to protect home-care workers from the harms posed by SHS should be a priority to help protect the health of this often overlooked occupational group.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
"为什么护理人员与监狱工作人员有什么不同?关于家庭护理探访期间二手烟暴露的定性研究以及消除暴露的潜在措施。
简介:尽管英国采取了世界领先的措施来保护员工免受工作场所二手烟的危害,但在私人住宅中提供医疗和社会护理服务的工作人员在这种环境下仍然不受二手烟暴露(SHS)的法律保护:14人参加了电话深度访谈(11人)或在线焦点小组讨论(3人),其中包括拉纳克郡(苏格兰)的家庭护理工作者(5人)和管理人员(5人)以及地方/国家政策制定者(4人)。参与者被问及家访期间接触可吸入有害气体的程度,以及为消除接触可采取的额外措施:结果:与会者强调了在个人家中提供护理与工作人员呼吸清洁空气和免受 SHS 影响的权利之间取得平衡的困难。据报告,目前减少员工在家访过程中接触 SHS 的策略往往不够充分,除了保护怀孕员工或患有哮喘等呼吸系统疾病的员工外,SHS 并未被管理者视为一种危害。简单的呼吸防护设备(如在 COVID-19 大流行期间使用的设备)被正确地认为是无效的。尼古丁替代疗法和电子烟等方法被认为是帮助吸烟者在家访前实现暂时戒烟的潜在方法:实施适当、适度的措施来保护家庭护理人员免受可吸入有害物质的危害,应成为帮助保护这一经常被忽视的职业群体健康的优先事项。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Annals Of Work Exposures and Health
Annals Of Work Exposures and Health Medicine-Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
19.20%
发文量
79
期刊介绍: About the Journal Annals of Work Exposures and Health is dedicated to presenting advances in exposure science supporting the recognition, quantification, and control of exposures at work, and epidemiological studies on their effects on human health and well-being. A key question we apply to submission is, "Is this paper going to help readers better understand, quantify, and control conditions at work that adversely or positively affect health and well-being?" We are interested in high quality scientific research addressing: the quantification of work exposures, including chemical, biological, physical, biomechanical, and psychosocial, and the elements of work organization giving rise to such exposures; the relationship between these exposures and the acute and chronic health consequences for those exposed and their families and communities; populations at special risk of work-related exposures including women, under-represented minorities, immigrants, and other vulnerable groups such as temporary, contingent and informal sector workers; the effectiveness of interventions addressing exposure and risk including production technologies, work process engineering, and personal protective systems; policies and management approaches to reduce risk and improve health and well-being among workers, their families or communities; methodologies and mechanisms that underlie the quantification and/or control of exposure and risk. There is heavy pressure on space in the journal, and the above interests mean that we do not usually publish papers that simply report local conditions without generalizable results. We are also unlikely to publish reports on human health and well-being without information on the work exposure characteristics giving rise to the effects. We particularly welcome contributions from scientists based in, or addressing conditions in, developing economies that fall within the above scope.
期刊最新文献
Measuring improvements in occupational health and safety in the artificial stone benchtop industry. Occupational exposure to chrysotile in an asbestos cement factory in Kyrgyzstan. Healthcare workers' experiences protecting themselves and their families during the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020-2021. Managing SARS-CoV-2 transmission risk in workplace COVID-19 outbreaks. "Why should care workers be any different from prison workers?" A qualitative study of second-hand smoke exposure during home-care visits and potential measures to eliminate exposure.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1