scholarly journals On-site personal protective equipment signage and use by road construction workers in Ghana: a comparative study of foreign- and locally-owned companies

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Isaac Kofi Yankson ◽  
Nana Kwame Nsiah-Achampong ◽  
Paul Okyere ◽  
Francis Afukaar ◽  
Easmon Otupiri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Road Construction ◽  
Construction Workers ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Hearing Protection ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Safety Issues ◽  
Hard Hat

Abstract Background Road construction work has specific risks and safety issues which have not been adequately addressed in most low- and middle-income countries, especially Africa. The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of personal protective equipment (PPE) use during road construction activities by workers in foreign- owned against locally-owned road construction companies in Ghana. Methods An institution-based cross-sectional survey was undertaken during January – March, 2020 to study 389 road construction workers who were actively working on site. They were unobtrusively observed to capture whether or not they wore the appropriate PPE at the time of the survey. The PPE of interest were: hard hat, goggles, shoes, nose masks, hearing protection, gloves and reflective vests/apparel. On-site posted PPE signage was also checked. Results Majority of workers were males (96.9%) and labourers (53.5%). Similar numbers of workers in locally-owned (195) and foreign-owned (194) companies were studied. Use of PPE varied considerably by type: shoes (78.7%), reflective vest (44.5%), gloves (30.6%), hard hat (27.0%), nose mask (17.2%), goggles (11.3%) and hearing protection (10.8%). For all types of PPE, use was higher for workers in foreign-owned companies compared with locally-owned companies: goggles (Odds ratio [OR] 55.2), hearing protection (OR 52.0), gloves (OR 23.7), hard hat (OR 20.2), nose mask (OR 17.8), reflective vest (OR 5.3) and shoes (OR 4.1), (p<0.001 for all ORs). No site had any signage to promote PPE use. Conclusions Majority of workers used shoes. Less than half of workers used other types of PPE and use of some types (goggles and hearing protection) was minimal. Workers in foreign-owned companies were significantly more likely to use all the seven types of PPE than locally-owned companies. Although there is still room for improvement in foreign-owned companies, locally-owned companies should be able to attain similar PPE use to that in foreign-owned companies. Necessary PPE should be provided and site supervisors should encourage workers to wear PPE when on site.

scholarly journals On-Site Personal Protective Equipment Signage and Use by Road Construction Workers in Ghana: A Comparative Study of Foreign- and Locally-Owned Companies

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Isaac Kofi Yankson ◽  
Nana Kwame Nsiah-Achampong ◽  
Paul Okyere ◽  
Francis Afukaar ◽  
Easmon Otupiri ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Professional Training ◽  
Road Construction ◽  
Construction Workers ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Hearing Protection ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Safety Issues ◽  
Construction Companies ◽  
Hard Hat

Abstract Background: Road construction work has its own specific set of risks and safety issues. It has not been adequately addressed in most low- and middle-income countries, especially in Africa. The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence of personal protective equipment (PPE) use during road construction activities by workers in foreign-owned against locally-owned road construction companies in Ghana.Methods: An institution-based cross-sectional survey was undertaken during January – March, 2020 to study 389 road construction workers who were actively working on site. They were unobtrusively observed to capture whether or not they wore the appropriate PPE at the time of the survey. The PPE of interest were: hard hat, goggles, shoes, nose masks, hearing protection, gloves, and reflective vests/apparel. On-site posted PPE signage was also checked. Results: Majority of workers were labourers (53.5%) and males (96.9%). Similar numbers of workers in foreign-owned (194) and locally-owned (195) companies were studied. Use of PPE varied considerably by type: goggles (11.3%), hard hat (27.0%), safety shoes (78.7%), gloves (30.6%), hearing protection (10.8%), reflective vest (44.5%) and nose mask (17.2%). For all types of PPE, use was higher among workers in foreign-owned companies compared with locally-owned companies: goggles (Odds ratio [OR] 55.2), hard hat (OR 20.2), safety shoes (OR 4.1), gloves (OR 23.7), hearing protection (OR 52.0), reflective vest (OR 5.3) and nose mask (OR 17.8) (p<0.001 for all ORs). No site had any signage to promote PPE use. Conclusions: Majority of workers used safety shoes. Less than half of workers used other types of PPE and use of some types (goggles and hearing protection) was minimal. Workers in foreign-owned companies were significantly more likely to use all of the types of PPE. Although there is still room for improvement in foreign-owned companies, locally-owned companies should be able to attain similar PPE use to that in foreign-owned companies. Road construction companies should place a premium on health and safety issues by hiring safety managers with professional training, providing staff with PPE, and training them on proper usage, as well as adopting safety protocols.

scholarly journals Stockpiled personal protective equipment and knowledge of pandemic plans as predictors of perceived pandemic preparedness among German general practitioners

PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (8) ◽  
pp. e0255986
Author(s):  
Arno Stöcker ◽  
Ibrahim Demirer ◽  
Sophie Gunkel ◽  
Jan Hoffmann ◽  
Laura Mause ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
General Practitioners ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Explanatory Power ◽  
Vital Role ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Linear Regression Models ◽  
Pandemic Preparedness ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Determining Factor

Background The COVID-19 pandemic significantly changed the work of general practitioners (GPs). At the onset of the pandemic in March 2020, German outpatient practices had to adapt quickly. Pandemic preparedness (PP) of GPs may play a vital role in their management of a pandemic. Objectives The study aimed to examine the association in the stock of seven personal protective equipment (PPE) items and knowledge of pandemic plans on perceived PP among GPs. Methods Three multivariable linear regression models were developed based on an online cross-sectional survey for the period March–April 2020 (the onset of the pandemic in Germany). Data were collected using self-developed items on self-assessed PP and knowledge of a pandemic plan and its utility. The stock of seven PPE items was queried. For PPE items, three different PPE scores were compared. Control variables for all models were gender and age. Results In total, 508 GPs were included in the study; 65.16% believed that they were very poorly or poorly prepared. Furthermore, 13.83% of GPs were aware of a pandemic plan; 40% rated those plans as beneficial. The stock of FFP-2/3 masks, protective suits, face shields, safety glasses, and medical face masks were mostly considered completely insufficient or insufficient, whereas disposable gloves and disinfectants were considered sufficient or completely sufficient. The stock of PPE was significantly positively associated with PP and had the largest effect on PP; the association of the knowledge of a pandemic plan was significant but small. PPE scores did not vary considerably in their explanatory power. The assessment of a pandemic plan as beneficial did not significantly affect PP. Conclusion The stock of PPE seems to be the determining factor for PP among German GPs; for COVID-19, sufficient masks are the determining factor. Knowledge of a pandemic plans play a secondary role in PP.

Personal Protective Equipment Management and Policies: European Network for Highly Infectious Diseases Data from 48 Isolation Facilities in 16 European Countries

2012 ◽  
Vol 33 (10) ◽  
pp. 1008-1016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giuseppina De Iaco ◽  
Vincenzo Puro ◽  
Francesco Maria Fusco ◽  
Stefan Schilling ◽  
Helena C. Maltezou ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Infectious Diseases ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
European Countries ◽  
Assessment Process ◽  
Positive Pressure ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Sudden Increase ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Isolation Facilities

Objective.To collect data about personal protective equipment (PPE) management and to provide indications for improving PPE policies in Europe.Design.Descriptive, cross-sectional survey.Setting and Participants.Data were collected in 48 isolation facilities in 16 European countries nominated by National Health Authorities for the management of highly infectious diseases (HIDs).Methods.Data were collected through standardized checklists at on-site visits during February-November 2009. Indications for adequate PPE policies were developed on the basis of a literature review, partners' expert opinions, and the collected data.Results.All facilities have procedures for the selection of PPE in case of HID, and 44 have procedures for the removal of PPE. In 40 facilities, different levels of PPE are used according to a risk assessment process, and in 8 facilities, high-level PPE (eg, positive-pressure complete suits or Trexler units) is always used. A fit test is performed at 25 of the 40 facilities at which it is applicable, a seal check is recommended at 25, and both procedures are used at 17. Strategies for promoting and monitoring the correct use of PPE are available at 42 facilities. In case of a sudden increase in demand, 44 facilities have procedures for rapid supply of PPE, whereas 14 facilities have procedures for decontamination and reuse of some PPE.Conclusions.Most isolation facilities devote an acceptable level of attention to PPE selection and removal, strategies for the promotion of the correct use of PPE, and ensuring adequate supplies of PPE. Fit test and seal check procedures are still not widely practiced. Moreover, policies vary widely between and within European countries, and the development of common practice procedures is advisable.Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2012;33(10):1008-1016

scholarly journals Awareness and utilization of personal protective equipment among small-scale welders in Cross River State, Nigeria: a descriptive cross-sectional study

2021 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Ekpereonne Esu ◽  
Utibeabasi Ekanem
Keyword(s):  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Small Scale ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Rapid Urbanization ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Cross River ◽  
Cross River State ◽  
Middle Income Countries ◽  
Low And Middle Income

Objective: Rapid urbanization and industrialization in the many low- and middle-income countries means that there is a growing demand for the welding industry. Previous studies in Nigeria, and other low- and middle-income countries have reported a significant discrepancy between awareness and consistent and appropriate use of personal protective equipment (PPE). This study assessed the awareness and utilization of PPE among small-scale welders in Calabar South, Cross River State, Nigeria. Methods: This study was conducted in Calabar South Local Government Area using a descriptive cross-sectional design. Data collection was with an interviewer-administered semi-structured questionnaire, and an observation checklist was used to monitor the use of PPE among small-scale welders. Results:  One hundred and sixteen small-scale welders were surveyed with a mean age of 34.9 ±9.1 years. Almost 90% of respondents had completed at least primary education. Eighty-one respondents (69.8%) were aware of PPE. Three-quarters of respondents (61/81) knew PPE protected the user from injury. The most frequently identified type of welding PPE among the respondents aware of PPE, were safety goggles (38.3%), hand gloves (25.9%), safety boots (19.8%), and coveralls (9.9%). 83.6% had access to PPE at work. However, only 14.4% reported using PPE consistently. Observation revealed that the PPE most frequently used, sunglasses, were not the recommended welding goggles. Conclusion:  The low utilization of PPE calls for stricter enforcement of occupational health and safety regulations among welders in the informal sector, including implementing PPE awareness programs.

scholarly journals Utilization of Personal Protective Equipment and Associated Factors among Building Construction Workers in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia 2019

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meseret Yitayew ◽  
Aklilu Azazeh ◽  
Sofia Kebede ◽  
Addisu Alehegn
Keyword(s):  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Associated Factors ◽  
Occupational Safety ◽  
Safety Management ◽  
Occupational Injuries ◽  
Addis Ababa ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Construction Site ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional

Abstract BackgroundPersonal Protective Equipment (PPE) is a material, device, equipment or clothing which is used or worn by a worker to protect them from exposure or contact with any harmful material or energy which may cause injury, disease or even death. The use of personal protective equipment is a universal legal requirement to protect workers against occupational injuries and illnesses in their workplace. The international labor office estimates that every year there are some 125 million work-related accidents, 220, 000 of them are fatal. This study assessed personal protective equipment utilization and associated factors among building construction workers in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia 2019.MethodsInstitution based cross-sectional survey was conducted on the selected construction sites in April 2019. Data was collected by using pre-tested Amharic questioner from 206 study subjects with a response rate of 100% via face to face interviews. Epi info version 7.1 and SPSS version 25 were used for data cleaning and analysis respectively. Independent variables with P<0.2 were transformed from bivariate to multivariate logistic regression. P<0.05 and was declared as an associated factor.ResultsThis study showed that (38.3%) of construction site workers were used at least one personal protective equipment. Presence of safety training, safety brief before commencing work and the availability of governmental visits were associated factors for utilization of personal protective equipment. Regarding, the type of injuries that occur on a majority of workers were abrasion (35%) and climbing at high was the common cause of injury. ConclusionsPPE utilization and safety measure in construction industries is insignificant and construction site workers are not adapted to take care of themselves as it manifested by low use of PPE. An effort for occupational safety assurance should be put in practice to avoid accidents on building a site with an unconditional commitment to all the projects. Riddance of hazards and deterrence of accidents on-site should be within the proficiency of each site. The client should be involved in safety management coupled with having a great craving for safety.

scholarly journals Associations between personal protective equipment and nursing staff stress during the COVID-19 pandemic

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manuela Hoedl ◽  
Doris Eglseer ◽  
Silvia Bauer
Keyword(s):  
Health Care ◽  
Nursing Staff ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Snowball Sampling ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Work Related ◽  
Stress Levels ◽  
High Level

Background: The results of several projects on the effects of personal protective equipment (PPE) have been published since the outbreak of COVID-19. It is known that wearing PPE, and specifically face masks, has physcial consequences like headache and pain, which can increase stress among nursing staff. However, none of these studies placed a focus on PPE and nursing staff, although nurses are the only members of the health care profession who are at the patients bedsides 24/7, and PPE is the only way to protect them from a COVID-19 infection. Therefore, this study was carried out to investigate the association between the use of PPE and stress among nursing staff during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods An online, cross-sectional survey was conducted, which we distributed using snowball sampling techniques. The questionnaire was developed on the basis of (inter-)national recommendations as well as the international literature. We used the perceived level of stress scale to measure the nursing staff members stress levels. Results We included data collected from 2600 nurses in this analysis. Nearly all nursing staff wore face masks. We showed that more than two-thirds of the nurses had moderate to high levels of stress. No statistically significant association between the use of PPE and stress was detected. However, we show a statistically significant association between the duration of mask usage and stress. Discussion and conclusions Nearly all participating nurses wore face masks or FFP masks to protect themselves from COVID-19 infection. This observation might indicate that Austrian nurses display a high level of compliance with national and international regulations and play a key role in such pandemics. Our results also show that increased mask-wearing time led to increased stress levels. These results suggest that (inter-)national regulations on how and when to use PPE should include a maximum duration of time for wearing each type of mask. Such regulations could help to prevent work-related stress, particularly in the case of future epidemics, and avoid burnout among nursing staff or even nurses leaving their jobs. The consequences of both of these negative outcomes should be considered in light of the predicted expected future shortage of health care workers.

scholarly journals Use of personal protective equipment during infectious disease outbreak and nonoutbreak conditions: a survey of emergency medical technicians

CJEM ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 11 (01) ◽  
pp. 44-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura M. Visentin ◽  
Susan J. Bondy ◽  
Brian Schwartz ◽  
Laurie J. Morrison
Keyword(s):  
Airway Management ◽  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Intermediate Frequency ◽  
Emergency Medical Technicians ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Cross Sectional Survey ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Mandatory Training ◽  
Emergency Medical ◽  
Open Face

ABSTRACTObjective:We sought to assess the knowledge of, use of and barriers to the use of personal protective equipment for airway management among emergency medical technicians (EMTs) during and since the 2003 Canadian outbreak of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS).Methods:Using a cross-sectional survey, EMTs in Toronto, Ont., were surveyed 1 year after the SARS outbreak during mandatory training on the use of personal protective equipment in airway management during the outbreak and just before taking the survey. Practices that were addressed reflected government directives on the use of this equipment. Main outcome measures included the frequency of personal protective equipment use and, as applicable, why particular items were not always used.Results:The response rate was 67.3% (n= 230). During the SARS outbreak, an N95-type particulate respirator was reported to bealwaysused by 91.5% of respondents. Conversely, 72.9% of the respondents reported that theyneverused the open face hood. Equipment availability and vision impairment were often cited as impediments to personal protective equipment use. In nonoutbreak conditions, only the antimicrobial airway filter was most often reported to bealwaysused (52.0%), while other items were used at an intermediate frequency. The most common reason for notalwaysdonning equipment was that paramedics deemed it unnecessary for the situation.Conclusion:Personal protective equipment is not consistently employed as per medical directives. Reasons given for nonuse included nonavailability, judgment of nonnecessity or technical difficulties. There are important public health implications of noncompliance.

scholarly journals Use of Personal Protective Equipment among Building Construction Workers in Kampala, Uganda

2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan Izudi ◽  
Viola Ninsiima ◽  
John Bosco Alege
Keyword(s):  
Personal Protective Equipment ◽  
Health And Safety ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Building Construction ◽  
Construction Workers ◽  
Protective Equipment ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Significance Level ◽  
Construction Companies ◽  
Workplace Accidents

Background. 270 million workplace accidents occur annually. In Uganda, Kampala district has the highest workplace injury and fatality rates. However, information on personal protective equipment (PPE)—hand gloves, hardhats, overalls, safety boots, earplugs, safety harness with lanyard, and face shields—utilization among building construction workers remains scarce. We assessed PPE utilization and determinants among building construction workers in Kampala, Uganda. Methods. This cross-sectional study involved 385 respondents. Data collected by structured questionnaire was double-entered in EpiData and analyzed in STATA at 5% significance level. Independent determinants of PPE use were established by a stepwise backward logistic regression analysis. Results. 305 (79.2%) respondents were males, 290 (75.3%) were 18–30 years, 285 (74.0%) completed secondary education, and 197 (51.2%) were temporary employees. 60 (15.6%) respondents used PPE. Female sex (adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 6.64; 95% CI: 1.55–28.46; P=0.011), temporary (AOR = 0.05; 95% CI: 0.01–0.27; P<0.001) and casual (AOR = 0.01; 95% CI: 0.001–0.071; P<0.001) employment, and previous knowledge of safety measures (AOR = 100.72; 95% CI: 26.00–390.16; P<0.001) were associated with PPE use. Conclusion. PPE use was low in Kampala, Uganda. Building construction companies should implement measures of the Uganda Occupational Health and Safety Act.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document