Evaluating the relative status of health and safety programs for minority academic and research institutions.

R Emery, G Delclos, S P Cooper, R Hardy
{"title":"Evaluating the relative status of health and safety programs for minority academic and research institutions.","authors":"R Emery,&nbsp;G Delclos,&nbsp;S P Cooper,&nbsp;R Hardy","doi":"10.1080/15428119891011054","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The health and safety programs that support academic and research institutions face many challenges because of the wide variety of potential hazards present and the possibility of simultaneous exposures to several agents. This study investigated whether differences in health and safety programs exist between minority and nonminority state-funded academic and research institutions. A cross-sectional mail survey was conducted that included 24 minority and 51 nonminority schools. Questionnaires solicited information on descriptive institutional parameters, health and safety staffing, the hazards present, programs in place to address hazards, and medical surveillance services. The hazard types identified as present on both campus types were found to be very similar. The mean number of health and safety staff serving minority institutions was lower (1.14 versus 3.12), with the difference reliably predicted by the number of institutional employees, not minority status or regulatory environment. Other targeted parameters were found to be similar, with a consistent lack of awareness of specific medical evaluations noted for both groups. Since on average a single person is charged with controlling a diverse set of potential hazards on the minority campuses studied, the need for a comprehensive awareness of a variety of health and safety issues is discussed.</p>","PeriodicalId":7930,"journal":{"name":"American Industrial Hygiene Association journal","volume":"59 12","pages":"882-8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1998-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/15428119891011054","citationCount":"10","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Industrial Hygiene Association journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15428119891011054","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 10

Abstract

The health and safety programs that support academic and research institutions face many challenges because of the wide variety of potential hazards present and the possibility of simultaneous exposures to several agents. This study investigated whether differences in health and safety programs exist between minority and nonminority state-funded academic and research institutions. A cross-sectional mail survey was conducted that included 24 minority and 51 nonminority schools. Questionnaires solicited information on descriptive institutional parameters, health and safety staffing, the hazards present, programs in place to address hazards, and medical surveillance services. The hazard types identified as present on both campus types were found to be very similar. The mean number of health and safety staff serving minority institutions was lower (1.14 versus 3.12), with the difference reliably predicted by the number of institutional employees, not minority status or regulatory environment. Other targeted parameters were found to be similar, with a consistent lack of awareness of specific medical evaluations noted for both groups. Since on average a single person is charged with controlling a diverse set of potential hazards on the minority campuses studied, the need for a comprehensive awareness of a variety of health and safety issues is discussed.

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
评估少数民族学术和研究机构的健康和安全计划的相对状况。
支持学术和研究机构的健康和安全项目面临着许多挑战,因为存在各种各样的潜在危害,并且可能同时暴露于几种物质。这项研究调查了少数民族和非少数民族国家资助的学术和研究机构在健康和安全项目上是否存在差异。在24所少数民族学校和51所非少数民族学校进行了横断面邮件调查。调查问卷要求提供有关描述性机构参数、卫生和安全人员配置、存在的危害、解决危害的方案以及医疗监督服务的信息。发现两种校园类型中存在的危害类型非常相似。为少数族裔机构服务的卫生和安全工作人员的平均人数较低(1.14人对3.12人),这一差异是由机构雇员人数可靠地预测的,而不是由少数族裔身份或监管环境预测的。发现其他目标参数相似,注意到两组始终缺乏对具体医疗评估的认识。由于在所研究的少数族裔校园中,平均一个人负责控制各种各样的潜在危险,因此讨论了对各种健康和安全问题全面认识的必要性。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Evaluation of leakage from a metal machining center using tracer gas methods: a case study. Assessment of magnetic field exposures for a mortality study at a uranium enrichment plant. An assessment of occupational noise exposures in four construction trades. Prediction of rectal temperature by the Questemp II personal heat strain monitor under low and moderate heat stress. The effects of keyswitch stiffness on typing force, finger electromyography, and subjective discomfort.
×
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