Occupational Risk Perception and the Use of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE): A Study Among Informal Automobile Artisans in Osun State, Nigeria

Informal workers in developing countries are exposed to various occupational hazards that may cause accidents, injuries, or diseases. Personal protective equipment (PPE) can be an essential tool for preventing workers from exposure to these hazards. Despite the widely acknowledged benefits of PPE usage, many informal automobile artisans in Nigeria do not use PPE. This study examines factors that predict PPE usage among these artisans, particularly their occupational risk perception. This cross-sectional study adopted a multistage method to select 632 automobile artisans (mechanics, panel beaters, painters, and vulcanizers) in Osun State, Nigeria. A questionnaire was used to obtain information on the dependent variable (the use of PPE) and the independent variables (occupational risk perception and risk tolerance). STATA 14 was used for the multivariate logistic regression analysis. Workers who perceive themselves at high risk of occupational health problems are more likely to use PPE (odds ratio [OR] = 2.1, p = .03), as are those who are very worried about getting accidents/illnesses (OR = 2.6, p = .03) or believe that these health problems are preventable (OR = 2.3, p = .01). Contrary to expectation, workers who experienced accidents/illnesses in the past are less likely to use PPE (OR = 0.3, p = .00) than those who did not. The established positive relationship between occupational risk perception and PPEs’ usage provides information to various stakeholders for designing safety programs that can reduce exposure to the occupational risks for informal automobile artisans in Nigeria.

Download Full-text

Infection control practices and challenges in Pakistan during the COVID-19 pandemic: a multicentre cross-sectional study

Journal of Infection Prevention ◽

10.1177/17571774211012761 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 175717742110127

Author(s):

Salma Abbas ◽

Faisal Sultan

Keyword(s):

Personal Protective Equipment ◽

Prevention And Control ◽

Infection Prevention ◽

Hospital Staff ◽

Cross Sectional Study ◽

Infection Prevention And Control ◽

Protective Equipment ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Healthcare Facilities ◽

And Control

Background: Patient and staff safety at healthcare facilities during outbreaks hinges on a prompt infection prevention and control response. Physicians leading these programmes have encountered numerous obstacles during the pandemic. Aim/objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate infection prevention and control practices and explore the challenges in Pakistan during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Methods: We conducted a cross-sectional study and administered a survey to physicians leading infection prevention and control programmes at 18 hospitals in Pakistan. Results: All participants implemented universal masking, limited the intake of patients and designated separate triage areas, wards and intensive care units for coronavirus disease 2019 patients at their hospitals. Eleven (61%) physicians reported personal protective equipment shortages. Staff at three (17%) hospitals worked without the appropriate personal protective equipment due to limited supplies. All participants felt overworked and 17 (94%) reported stress. Physicians identified the lack of negative pressure rooms, fear and anxiety among hospital staff, rapidly evolving guidelines, personal protective equipment shortages and opposition from hospital staff regarding the choice of recommended personal protective equipment as major challenges during the pandemic. Discussion: The results of this study highlight the challenges faced by physicians leading infection prevention and control programmes in Pakistan. It is essential to support infection prevention and control personnel and bridge the identified gaps to ensure patient and staff safety at healthcare facilities.

Download Full-text

Work-related Injury among Welders Working in Metal Workshops of Dharan Municipality, Nepal

Journal of Nepal Health Research Council ◽

10.3126/jnhrc.v16i2.20302 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 16 (2) ◽

pp. 156-159

Author(s):

Anup Ghimire ◽

Shyam Sundar Budhathoki ◽

Surya Raj Niraula ◽

Abha Shrestha ◽

Paras K Pokharel

Keyword(s):

Personal Protective Equipment ◽

Cross Sectional Study ◽

Protective Equipment ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Work Related ◽

The Past ◽

Occupational Characteristics ◽

Recorded Data ◽

The Relationship ◽

Structured Questionnaire

Background: Injuries are a problem worldwide in all occupations. Welders are exposed to many hazards at work resulting in a variety of health problems including injuries at work. This study was conducted to find out the prevalence and factors associated with injuries among welders in Dharan city of eastern Nepal.Methods: A cross sectional study was conducted among 86 welders in Dharan city. Occurrence of injury in past 2 weeks and past 12 months were recorded. Data regarding sociodemographic along with occupational characteristics was collected using semi structured questionnaire. Data analysis was done using SPSS version 17.Results: All the welders in this study were male with almost half of the welders under the age of 25 years and about a fifth (21.1%) of the welders having received some form of welding training. In the past 12 months, 21.1% of the welders suffered from work related injuries. More than 95% welders used at least one personal protective equipment in this study. More injuries were seen among welders with age ≥35 years, working experience ≥ 5 years, not received training and not using of PPE at work. However, these factors were not found to be statistically significant.Conclusions: Work related injuries are high among welders of Dharan. Further research is required to explore the relationship between age, literacy, training and use of personal protective equipment with the occurrence of injuries among the welders.

Download Full-text

COVID-19 infections among Healthcare Workers and Transmission within Households

10.1101/2020.06.12.20129619 ◽

2020 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Kevin L. Schwartz ◽

Camille Achonu ◽

Sarah A. Buchan ◽

Kevin A. Brown ◽

Brenda Lee ◽

...

Keyword(s):

General Population ◽

Personal Protective Equipment ◽

Healthcare Workers ◽

Population Based ◽

Cross Sectional Study ◽

Nosocomial Transmission ◽

Protective Equipment ◽

Sectional Study ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Testing Bias

AbstractImportanceProtecting healthcare workers (HCWs) from COVID-19 is a priority to maintain a safe and functioning healthcare system. The risk of transmitting COVID-19 to family members is a source of stress for many.ObjectiveTo describe and compare HCW and non-HCW COVID-19 cases in Ontario, Canada, as well as the frequency of COVID-19 among HCWs’ household members.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsUsing reportable disease data at Public Health Ontario which captures all COVID-19 cases in Ontario, Canada, we conducted a population-based cross-sectional study comparing demographic, exposure, and clinical variables between HCWs and non-HCWs with COVID-19 as of 14 May 2020. We calculated rates of infections over time and determined the frequency of within household transmissions using natural language processing based on residential address.Exposures and OutcomesWe contrasted age, gender, comorbidities, clinical presentation (including asymptomatic and presymptomatic), exposure histories including nosocomial transmission, and clinical outcomes between HCWs and non-HCWs with confirmed COVID-19.ResultsThere were 4,230 (17.5%) HCW COVID-19 cases in Ontario, of whom 20.2% were nurses, 2.3% were physicians, and the remaining 77.4% other specialties. HCWs were more likely to be between 30-60 years of age and female. HCWs were more likely to present asymptomatically (8.1% versus 7.0%, p=0.010) or with atypical symptoms (17.8% versus 10.5%, p<0.001). The mortality among HCWs was 0.2% compared to 10.5% of non-HCWs. HCWs commonly had exposures to a confirmed case or outbreak (74.1%), however only 3.1% were confirmed to be nosocomial. The rate of new infections was 5.5 times higher in HCWs than non-HCWs, but mirrored the epidemic curve. We identified 391 (9.8%) probable secondary household transmissions and 143 (3.6%) acquisitions. Children < 19 years comprised 14.6% of secondary cases compared to only 4.2% of the primary cases.Conclusions and RelevanceHCWs represent a disproportionate number of COVID-19 cases in Ontario but with low confirmed numbers of nosocomial transmission. The data support substantial testing bias and under-ascertainment of general population cases. Protecting HCWs through appropriate personal protective equipment and physical distancing from colleagues is paramount.Key PointsQuestionWhat are the differences between healthcare workers and non-healthcare workers with COVID-19?FindingsIn this population-based cross-sectional study there were 4,230 healthcare workers comprising 17.5% of COVID-19 cases. Healthcare workers were diagnosed with COVID-19 at a rate 5.5 times higher than the general population with 0.8% of all healthcare workers, compared to 0.1% of non-healthcare workers.MeaningHigh healthcare worker COVID-19 burden highlights the importance of physical distancing from colleagues, appropriate personal protective equipment, as well as likely substantial testing bias and under-ascertainment of COVID-19 in the general population.

Download Full-text

Mask and Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) Associated Headache: A Cross-Sectional Study among the COVID-Time Physicians in Bangladesh

Headache Medicine Connections ◽

10.52828/hmc.v1i2.8 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 1 (2) ◽

pp. 12-22

Author(s):

K M Nazmul Islam Joy ◽

Reaz Mahmud ◽

Md Golam Rabbani ◽

Md Khairul Islam ◽

Rajesh Saha ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Personal Protective Equipment ◽

Cross Sectional Study ◽

Protective Equipment ◽

Sectional Study ◽

Cross Sectional

Download Full-text

FACTORS AFFECTING NURSE ANXIETY IN ROLE AS A CAREGIVER DURING THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC

Nurse and Health: Jurnal Keperawatan ◽

10.36720/nhjk.v10i1.233 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 10 (1) ◽

pp. 108-115

Author(s):

Yurike Septianingrum ◽

Andikawati Fitriasari ◽

Erika Martining Wardani

Keyword(s):

Logistic Regression ◽

Personal Protective Equipment ◽

Health Workers ◽

Psychological Symptoms ◽

Cross Sectional Study ◽

Protective Equipment ◽

Multivariate Logistic Regression ◽

Chi Square ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Chi Square Test

Background: During the Covid-19 outbreak, health workers, especially nurses, are vulnerable to potential psychological symptoms such as anxiety, which can prevent nurses from carrying out their role as caregivers in health services (Lai et al., 2020; Shanafelt et al., 2020). Objectives: The purpose of this study is to analyze the factors that can influence the anxiety of nurses in playing the role of caregiver during the Covid-19 pandemic. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study with a population of all nurses who met the inclusion criteria as much as 105 nurses. The research sample was selected through stratified random sampling and obtained 84 nurses. This research was conducted at RSI Jemursari Surabaya from June until September 2020. The research instruments used in this study were the demographic observation sheet, knowledge questionnaire, and the Hamilton Anxiety Rank Scale (HARS). Data analysis used Pearson chi-square test and multivariate logistic regression. Results: The results of the Pearson Chi-square test showed that of all the factors studied, only age (p = 0.004), availability of personal protective equipment (p = 0.002), and knowledge (p = 0.017) influenced nurses' anxiety. The results of the analysis using multivariate logistic regression test showed that the factor that most influenced nurses' anxiety was the availability of personal protective equipment (p = 0.001; OR = -3.062). Conclusion: Younger nurses, inadequate personal protective equipment, and less knowledgeable nurses were at high risk for more severe anxiety. Regular observation of the psychological condition of nurses and the fulfillment of the need for personal protective equipment is needed to prevent increased anxiety in nurses. Keywords: Nurse, anxiety, Covid-19, caregiver.

Download Full-text

awareness about personal protective equipments and health problems among poultry workers

Northern International Medical College Journal ◽

10.3329/nimcj.v5i2.23130 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 5 (2) ◽

pp. 336-338 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Shila Rani Das ◽

Nasreen Begum ◽

Chinmay Biswas ◽

Md Nazmul Hoq ◽

Jahangir Hossain

Keyword(s):

Work Experience ◽

Economic Status ◽

Health Hazard ◽

Cross Sectional Study ◽

Health Problems ◽

Protective Equipment ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Medical College ◽

Skin Problem ◽

Poultry Workers

Background: Taking protective equipment is important for poultry workers as they are at risk of poultry hazard. Use of personal protective equipment (PPE) is essential for preventing & controlling diseases experienced by poultry processing workers.Aims and Objectives: To assess the awareness about personal protective equipments and health problems among poultry workers.Method and materials: Descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted under the guidance of the Department of Community Medicine, National Institute of Preventive and Social Medicine (NIPSOM), Dhaka, from March to June 2006 on 100 poultry workers who were selected purposively from six poultry farms from the area of Gazipur districts. Informed consent was obtained and structured questionnaire was used to collect data through face to face interview. Data was edited, processed and analyzed both manually and used of SPSS version 10.Result: Mean age was 27.49% with SD ± 9.84 years, highest age range 59% was 20-30 years. Regarding level of education & economic status revealed that 43% were illiterate and 72% earned 2000-3000 taka monthly. 20% had highest work experience of 6-8 years. 82% of the respondents thought that personal protection is necessary during working in poultry. 79% of the respondents knew the name of PPE. But only 42% use PPE and 58% of the respondents did not use it. Among the user 16% use PPE regularly and 26% use PPE irregularly. Result showed significant association between education and knowledge of diseases of transmission (p<0.004). Observing health hazard 34.71% had respiratory problem 27.27% skin problem 23.14% eye problem. Significant association found between itching (skin problem) and use of PPE (p<0.004).Conclusion : Literate person had more knowledge about disease transmissions. The respondents who used PPE suffered less from health problems. For the safety of poultry workers advocacy arrangements of training program and formulation of guideline and regulations are important points to be considered.Northern International Medical College Journal Vol.5(2) 2014: 336-338

Download Full-text

Impact of enhanced personal protective equipment on the physical and mental well-being of healthcare workers during COVID-19

Postgraduate Medical Journal ◽

10.1136/postgradmedj-2020-139150 ◽

2020 ◽

pp. postgradmedj-2020-139150 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Ramanathan Swaminathan ◽

Bimantha Perera Mukundadura ◽

Shashi Prasad

Keyword(s):

Personal Protective Equipment ◽

Healthcare Workers ◽

Healthcare Professionals ◽

Negative Impact ◽

Well Being ◽

Cross Sectional Study ◽

Protective Equipment ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

The Impact ◽

Mental Well Being

BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has necessitated the use of enhanced personal protective equipment (PPE) in healthcare workers in patient-facing roles. We describe the impact on the physical and mental well-being of healthcare professionals who use enhanced PPE consistently.MethodsWe conducted a single-centre, cross-sectional study among healthcare professionals who use enhanced PPE. A web-based questionnaire was disseminated to evaluate the effects on individuals’ physical and mental well-being. Physical and mental impact was assessed through a visual analogue scale.ResultsProspective analysis of the views of 72 respondents is reported. 63.9% were women and 36.1% were men. Physical impact included exhaustion, headache, skin changes, breathlessness and a negative impact on vision. Communication difficulties, somnolence, negative impact on overall performance and difficulties in using surgical instrumentation were reported.ConclusionOur study demonstrates the undeniable negative impact on the front-line healthcare workers using enhanced PPE and lays the ground for larger multicentric assessments given for it to potentially be the norm for the foreseeable future.

Download Full-text

Prevalence and Factors Influencing Eye Injuries among Welders in Accra, Ghana

Advances in Preventive Medicine ◽

10.1155/2020/2170247 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 2020 ◽

pp. 1-8

Author(s):

Karl Kafui Kwaku Tetteh ◽

Richard Owusu ◽

Wisdom Kudzo Axame

Keyword(s):

Personal Protective Equipment ◽

Cross Sectional Study ◽

Electric Arc ◽

Systematic Sampling ◽

Protective Equipment ◽

Monthly Income ◽

Eye Injuries ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Work Related ◽

Factors Influencing

Background. Eye injuries are one of the most common work-related injuries among certain occupations, including welders. The aim of this study was to determine the prevalence and factors influencing eye injuries among welders in Accra, Ghana. Methods. In a cross-sectional study, we recruited 382 welders in Accra from two welding sites. Systematic sampling was used to select participants. A pretested semistructured questionnaire was used to collect demographic information, history of eye injuries, ownership, and use of eye protective equipment and workplace characteristics. Bivariate and multivariate logistic regressions at 5% level of significance were used to determine factors influencing eye injuries. Data were entered into Microsoft excel and exported to Stata 16/MP for analysis. Results. We found 59.7% of welders engaged in electric/arc welding and 40.3% in gas welding. Overall prevalence of eye injuries was 47.9%, higher among electric/arc welders (73.7%) compared to gas welders (9.7%). Factors associated with eye injuries were engaging in gas welding [AOR: 0.08, 95% CI: 0.04–0.16], higher monthly income [AOR = 5.26; 95% CI: 1.72–16.09], nonuse of eye PPE while working [AOR = 1.86; 95% CI: 1.02–3.43], and no training on the use of eye personal protective equipment [AOR = 2.17; 95% CI: 1.07–4.38]. Conclusion. There is high prevalence of welding-related eye injuries among electric welders. Gas welding, high monthly income, nonuse of eye protective equipment, and inadequate training on the use of eye protective equipment were significantly associated with eye injuries. Health policies should be implemented to ensure all welders use eye personal protective equipment.

Download Full-text

An Investigation on the Harmful Biological Factors of Workplace among Administrative Workers of Power Plant in South of Iran

Occupational Hygiene and Health Promotion ◽

10.18502/ohhp.v2i3.150 ◽

2018 ◽

Author(s):

Behnoush JAFARI ◽

Bahram KOUHNAVARD ◽

Mohammadreza NAJIMI ◽

Fereshteh JAHANI ◽

Zeinab MOSAVIAN ASL

Keyword(s):

Power Plant ◽

Personal Protective Equipment ◽

Positive Culture ◽

Pathogenic Fungi ◽

Cross Sectional Study ◽

Personal Hygiene ◽

Protective Equipment ◽

Biological Factors ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Opportunistic Pathogenic

Introduction: The working conditions, type of activity, and production or consumption of different materials expose the employees to harmful biological factors, which leads to infectious diseases. The purpose of this study was to investigate the harmful biological agents of the work environment among administrative personnel of a power plant in south of Iran. Methods: This descriptive and cross-sectional study was conducted among 200 administrative workers of different sections of power plant in 2016. The participants used personal protective equipment and samples were collected from five parts of the participants' body including auricle, inside the ear, the area between the toes, palm of foot, toe nails. Finally, 1000 samples were collected. Results: The mean age of the workers was years and all participants were male. Of the 1000 samples cultivated in the laboratory, 192 (96%) people had negative and 8 (4%) had positive culture results. The results showed that auricle had the highest rate of opportunistic pathogenic fungi (87.5%). The most positive cases of opportunistic pathogens were associated with workshops, warehouses, and operational buildings. Conclusion: Regarding the results of the study, we need to implement more health care in the mentioned places, observe personal hygiene in keeping the feet dry, not using protective handsets (air plug and earmuff) of other people, disinfecting the personal protective equipment, and daily washing to prevent the spread of the disease to other people.

Download Full-text

Evaluation of knowledge and practice of handling chemotherapy agents by nurses: a multi-centre studies in Bangladesh

International Journal of Community Medicine and Public Health ◽

10.18203/2394-6040.ijcmph20194471 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 6 (10) ◽

pp. 4175 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

M. Sohrab Hosen ◽

Mehedi Hasan ◽

M. Saiful Islam ◽

M. M. Raseduzzaman ◽

M. Tanvirul Islam ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Personal Protective Equipment ◽

Professional Training ◽

Health Hazard ◽

Cross Sectional Study ◽

Protective Equipment ◽

Medical Surveillance ◽

Cross Sectional ◽

Biological Safety ◽

Expert Input ◽

Chemotherapy Agents

Background: Along with several significant factors in chemotherapy treatment management’s nurses plays the pivotal role. The objective of this study was to evaluate the knowledge of nurses in relation to handling chemotherapy and the current practice of cancer centers in different hospitals in Bangladesh.Methods: The cross-sectional study was designed based on anonymous self-administered questionnaire. The questionnaire was developed from literature and expert input and validated by subject experts.Results: A total of 96 nurses were the respondents in this study. Around half of them already exposed directly with chemotherapy agents. Some 72.9% of nurses had not any training and 58.3% of respondents were not aware about use of closed system transfer devise in chemotherapy. A greater proportion 58.3% of nurses did not know the same health hazard of both oral and parenteral drugs. One third (33.3%) respondents used biological safety cabinet for doing preparation. Nurses’ did not use especial personal protective equipment and the designed treatment room also was absent. None of nurses went through regular medical checkup.Conclusions: The evidence-based results suggested that nurses have average knowledge about chemotherapy handling, however, use of personal protective equipment and biological safety cabinet, follow guidelines, medical surveillance and training are appeared to be a hindrance. More fundamentally, nurses need more education and professional training about chemotherapy agents handling in nursing school and through in-service continuing education as well as adopt required facilities are necessary.

Download Full-text