"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.
{"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.
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.