景观美化服务行业的危险暴露和工程控制。

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q4 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene Pub Date : 2025-03-01 Epub Date: 2025-01-02 DOI:10.1080/15459624.2024.2439810
Barbara M Alexander, Pamela S Graydon, Mirle Pena, H Amy Feng, Bryan R Beamer
{"title":"景观美化服务行业的危险暴露和工程控制。","authors":"Barbara M Alexander, Pamela S Graydon, Mirle Pena, H Amy Feng, Bryan R Beamer","doi":"10.1080/15459624.2024.2439810","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Landscapers are exposed to noise, carbon monoxide (CO), respirable dust, and respirable crystalline silica (RCS) generated from the tools they use. Although engineering controls are available to reduce these exposures, no previous study has evaluated chronic exposures to landscapers in different work settings and compared exposures from landscaping tools with and without engineering controls. This field study of workers in the landscaping services industry documented the occupational exposures of 80 participants at 11 varied worksites to noise, CO, respirable dust, and RCS using personal breathing zone sampling. Results were analyzed using SAS/STAT 14.1. Analysis of variance was used for normally distributed data; otherwise, nonparametric methods were used. Most workers were overexposed to noise, with 94 of the 119 8-hr time-weighted average (TWA) noise exposures at or above the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) recommended exposure limit (REL) of 85 dBA. There were no statistically significant differences among different locations or occupations. No 8-hr TWA exposures to CO above the NIOSH REL were measured. Overexposures to RCS were measured at all locations where hardscaping (installing or maintaining non-living aspects of the landscape) was taking place. This is the first known field study of this type to include hardscapers. The use of engineering controls such as dust capture or wet methods would reduce RCS exposures, but respiratory protection may still be needed. Task-based analysis of noise and CO exposure revealed that the loudest landscaping tools used in this study were hardscaping table saws, gas chainsaws, gas leaf blowers, chipper/shredders, gas string trimmers, and fuel mowers. Workers were exposed to significantly more noise and CO when using fuel-powered versions compared to battery-powered versions of leaf blowers, string trimmers, and chainsaws.</p>","PeriodicalId":16599,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene","volume":" ","pages":"189-202"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hazardous exposures and engineering controls in the landscaping services industry.\",\"authors\":\"Barbara M Alexander, Pamela S Graydon, Mirle Pena, H Amy Feng, Bryan R Beamer\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/15459624.2024.2439810\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Landscapers are exposed to noise, carbon monoxide (CO), respirable dust, and respirable crystalline silica (RCS) generated from the tools they use. Although engineering controls are available to reduce these exposures, no previous study has evaluated chronic exposures to landscapers in different work settings and compared exposures from landscaping tools with and without engineering controls. This field study of workers in the landscaping services industry documented the occupational exposures of 80 participants at 11 varied worksites to noise, CO, respirable dust, and RCS using personal breathing zone sampling. Results were analyzed using SAS/STAT 14.1. Analysis of variance was used for normally distributed data; otherwise, nonparametric methods were used. Most workers were overexposed to noise, with 94 of the 119 8-hr time-weighted average (TWA) noise exposures at or above the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) recommended exposure limit (REL) of 85 dBA. There were no statistically significant differences among different locations or occupations. No 8-hr TWA exposures to CO above the NIOSH REL were measured. Overexposures to RCS were measured at all locations where hardscaping (installing or maintaining non-living aspects of the landscape) was taking place. This is the first known field study of this type to include hardscapers. The use of engineering controls such as dust capture or wet methods would reduce RCS exposures, but respiratory protection may still be needed. Task-based analysis of noise and CO exposure revealed that the loudest landscaping tools used in this study were hardscaping table saws, gas chainsaws, gas leaf blowers, chipper/shredders, gas string trimmers, and fuel mowers. Workers were exposed to significantly more noise and CO when using fuel-powered versions compared to battery-powered versions of leaf blowers, string trimmers, and chainsaws.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16599,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"189-202\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/15459624.2024.2439810\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/2 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15459624.2024.2439810","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

园艺师暴露在噪音,一氧化碳(CO),可呼吸性粉尘和可呼吸性结晶二氧化硅(RCS)从他们使用的工具产生。虽然工程控制可以减少这些暴露,但之前没有研究评估过园丁在不同工作环境中的慢性暴露,并比较了有和没有工程控制的景观工具的暴露。这项对园林绿化服务行业工人的实地研究记录了80名参与者在11个不同工作场所对噪音、一氧化碳、可呼吸性粉尘和RCS的职业暴露,使用个人呼吸区抽样。采用SAS/STAT 14.1对结果进行分析。正态分布数据采用方差分析;否则,使用非参数方法。大多数工人过度暴露于噪音,119个8小时时间加权平均(TWA)噪音暴露中有94个达到或超过国家职业安全与健康研究所(NIOSH)建议的85 dBA的暴露限值(REL)。不同地区或职业之间没有统计学上的显著差异。没有测量超过NIOSH REL的8小时TWA暴露于CO。在所有进行硬景观(安装或维护景观的非生物方面)的地点,都测量了RCS的过度暴露。这是已知的第一次对这种类型的野外研究,其中包括硬纸板。使用诸如粉尘捕获或湿法等工程控制将减少RCS暴露,但可能仍然需要呼吸保护。基于任务的噪音和一氧化碳暴露分析显示,本研究中使用的最大噪音景观工具是硬景观台锯、气链锯、气吹叶机、切碎机/碎纸机、气串修剪机和燃料割草机。与使用电池驱动的吹叶机、剪绳机和链锯相比,工人们在使用燃料驱动的版本时,暴露在明显更多的噪音和一氧化碳中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Hazardous exposures and engineering controls in the landscaping services industry.

Landscapers are exposed to noise, carbon monoxide (CO), respirable dust, and respirable crystalline silica (RCS) generated from the tools they use. Although engineering controls are available to reduce these exposures, no previous study has evaluated chronic exposures to landscapers in different work settings and compared exposures from landscaping tools with and without engineering controls. This field study of workers in the landscaping services industry documented the occupational exposures of 80 participants at 11 varied worksites to noise, CO, respirable dust, and RCS using personal breathing zone sampling. Results were analyzed using SAS/STAT 14.1. Analysis of variance was used for normally distributed data; otherwise, nonparametric methods were used. Most workers were overexposed to noise, with 94 of the 119 8-hr time-weighted average (TWA) noise exposures at or above the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) recommended exposure limit (REL) of 85 dBA. There were no statistically significant differences among different locations or occupations. No 8-hr TWA exposures to CO above the NIOSH REL were measured. Overexposures to RCS were measured at all locations where hardscaping (installing or maintaining non-living aspects of the landscape) was taking place. This is the first known field study of this type to include hardscapers. The use of engineering controls such as dust capture or wet methods would reduce RCS exposures, but respiratory protection may still be needed. Task-based analysis of noise and CO exposure revealed that the loudest landscaping tools used in this study were hardscaping table saws, gas chainsaws, gas leaf blowers, chipper/shredders, gas string trimmers, and fuel mowers. Workers were exposed to significantly more noise and CO when using fuel-powered versions compared to battery-powered versions of leaf blowers, string trimmers, and chainsaws.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene
Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene 环境科学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
10.00%
发文量
81
审稿时长
12-24 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene ( JOEH ) is a joint publication of the American Industrial Hygiene Association (AIHA®) and ACGIH®. The JOEH is a peer-reviewed journal devoted to enhancing the knowledge and practice of occupational and environmental hygiene and safety by widely disseminating research articles and applied studies of the highest quality. The JOEH provides a written medium for the communication of ideas, methods, processes, and research in core and emerging areas of occupational and environmental hygiene. Core domains include, but are not limited to: exposure assessment, control strategies, ergonomics, and risk analysis. Emerging domains include, but are not limited to: sensor technology, emergency preparedness and response, changing workforce, and management and analysis of "big" data.
期刊最新文献
Perspective on occupational health and safety of sterilization unit employees and unit safety. Dermal wipe sampling method development and validation for semivolatile and nonvolatile flame-retardant compounds TBBPA and TPP for use in occupational exposure assessments. Exploring aerosol-specific calibration and performance of three direct-reading photometers. Toward rapid silica analysis of CPDM samples: A study of dust recovery and quartz estimation using lab and field samples. A comparison of the ventilatory responses to wearing either a hood or a mask escape respirator with identical nose-cups.
×
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