Search

The purpose was to develop a questionnaire instrument to measure difficulties in activities and participation, and impact of environmental factors in chemical intolerance, based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health, and to assess its validity and reliability. Development in three steps: (1) choosing items of relevance for chemical intolerance with an expert group, (2) conducting interviews with persons with chemical intolerance, using sampling to redundancy, (3) conducting a survey with 112 respondents at a first assessment and 91 at a second assessment for test-retest. The final version of the instrument consists of 57 items divided in three parts, which showed good internal consistency in each part, Cronbach alpha: 0.73–0.87. It had good content validity, readability and face validity. Test-retest showed good to very good (≥0.61) Kappa agreement for 37 items, and moderate (0.41–0.60) for 17 items. Three items had poor or fair (<0.41) Kappa agreement. The instrument was found to be valid and reliable. It can be used as a clinical tool to help persons with chemical intolerance to receive the best suited help and support for each individual, identify key points in rehabilitation, measure rehabilitation outcome and establish priority for treatment. The questionnaire instrument based on the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health which was developed and evaluated in this study, can be used to measure difficulties in activities and participation, and impact of environmental factors in chemical intolerance. Persons with chemical intolerance report lack of support from healthcare and society. Using this questionnaire instrument can help forming the best suited help and support for each individual based on his/her preconditions. This questionnaire instrument can be used to identify key points in rehabilitation and measure rehabilitation outcome. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Dust is generally sampled on a filter using air pumps, but passive sampling could be a cost-effective alternative. One promising passive sampler is the University of North Carolina passive aerosol sampler (UNC sampler). The aim of this study is to characterize and compare the UNC sampler's performance with PM10 and PM2.5 impactors in a working environment. Methods: Area sampling was carried out at different mining locations using UNC samplers in parallel with PM2.5 and PM10 impactors. Two different collection surfaces, polycarbonate (PC) and carbon tabs (CT), were employed for the UNC sampling. Sampling was carried out for 4-25 hours. Results: The UNC samplers underestimated the concentrations compared to PM10 and PM2.5 impactor data. At the location with the highest aerosol concentration, the time-averaged mean of PC showed 24% and CT 35% of the impactor result for PM2.5. For PM10, it was 39% with PC and 58% with CT. Sample blank values differed between PC and CT. For PM2.5, PC blank values were ~7 times higher than those of CT, but only 1.8 times higher for PM10. The blank variations were larger for PC than for CT. Conclusions: Particle mass concentrations appear to be underestimated by the UNC sampler compared to impactors, more so for PM2.5 than for PM10. CT may be preferred as a collection surface because the blank values were lower and less variable than for PC. Future validations in the working environment should include respirable dust sampling. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The results from this study has implications for the treatment of persons affected by building related symptoms, since not only the environment needs to be treated, but also the possible consequences such as burnout or sleep problems. Objective: This study investigates different aspects of stress and sleep in medically examined individuals with varying severity of building-related symptoms (BRS). Methods: Three questionnaires were used to assess acute and long-term stress and sleep (Perceived Stress Scale; Shirom Melamed Burnout Questionnaire, and Karolinska Sleep Questionnaire). Results: Individuals with BRS, regardless of severity, did not differ in level of perceived stress (indicator of short-term stress). The indicators of long-term stress differed between the groups where an increased severity was associated with higher levels of burnout and sleep problems. Conclusions: The study suggests an association between symptom severity and measures of long-term stress and sleep quality. This has implications for the treatment of persons affected by BRS, because not only the environment needs to be treated, but also the concurrent signs of distress, such as burnout or sleep problems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: There are numerous factors including physical, biomechanical, and individual that influence exposure to hand-transmitted vibration (HTV) and cause variability in the exposure measurements. Knowledge of exposure variability and determinants of exposure could be used to improve working conditions. We performed a quasi-experimental study, where operators performed routine work tasks in order to obtain estimates of the variance components and to evaluate the effect of determinants, such as machine–wheel combinations and individual operator characteristics. Methods: Two pre-defined simulated work tasks were performed by 11 operators: removal of a weld puddle of mild steel and cutting of a square steel pipe. In both tasks, four angle grinders were used, two running on compressed air and two electrically driven. Two brands of both grinding and cutting wheels were used. Each operator performed both tasks twice in a random order with each grinder and wheel and the time to complete each task was recorded. Vibration emission values were collected and the wheel wear was measured as loss of weight. Operators’ characteristics collected were as follows: age, body height and weight, length and volume of their hands, maximum hand grip force, and length of work experience with grinding machines (years). The tasks were also performed by one operator who used four machines of the same brand. Mixed and random effects models were used in the statistical evaluation. Results: The statistical evaluation was performed for grinding and cutting separately and we used a measure referring to the sum of the 1-s r.m.s. average frequency-weighted acceleration over time for completing the work task (asa). Within each work task, there was a significant effect as a result of the determinants ‘the machine used’, ‘wheel wear’, and ‘time taken to complete the task’. For cutting, ‘the brand of wheel’ used also had a significant effect. More than 90% of the inherent variability in the data was explained by the determinants. The two electrically powered machines had a mean asa that was 2.6 times higher than the two air-driven machines. For cutting, the effect of the brand of wheel on asa was ~0.1 times. The asa increased both with increasing wheel wear and with time taken to complete the work task. However, there were also a number of interaction effects which, to a minor extent, modified the asa. Only a minor part (1%) of the total variability was attributed to the operator: for cutting, the volume of the hands, maximum grip force, and body weight were significant, while for grinding, it was the maximum grip force. There was no clear difference in asa between the four copies of the same brand of each machine. Conclusions: By including determinants that were attributed to the brand of both machine and wheel used as well as the time taken to complete the work task, we were able to explain >90% of the variability. The dominating determinant was the brand of the machine. Little variability was found between operators, indicating that the overall effect as due to the operator was small. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background: Measurements of exposure to vibrations from hand-held tools are often conducted on a single occasion. However, repeated measurements may be crucial for estimating the actual dose with good precision. In addition, knowledge of determinants of exposure could be used to improve working conditions. The aim of this study was to assess hand–arm vibration (HAV) exposure during different grinding operations, in order to obtain estimates of the variance components and to evaluate the effect of work postures.Methods: Ten experienced operators used two compressed air-driven angle grinders of the same make in a simulated work task at a workplace. One part of the study consisted of using a grinder while assuming two different working postures: at a standard work bench (low) and on a wall with arms elevated and the work area adjusted to each operator’s height (high). The workers repeated the task three times. In another part of the study, investigating the wheel wear, for each grinder, the operators used two new grinding wheels and with each wheel the operator performed two consecutive 1-min grinding tasks. Both grinding tasks were conducted on weld puddles of mild steel on a piece of mild steel. Measurements were taken according to ISO-standard 5349 [the equivalent hand–arm-weighted acceleration (m s−2) averaged over 1 min]. Mixed- and random-effects models were used to investigate the influence of the fixed variables and to estimate variance components.Results: The equivalent hand–arm-weighted acceleration assessed when the task was performed on the bench and at the wall was 3.2 and 3.3 m s−2, respectively. In the mixed-effects model, work posture was not a significant variable. The variables ‘operator’ and ‘grinder’ together explained only 12% of the exposure variability and ‘grinding wheel’ explained 47%; the residual variability of 41% remained unexplained. When the effect of grinding wheel wear was investigated in the random-effects model, 37% of the variability was associated with the wheel while minimal variability was associated with the operator or the grinder and 37% was unexplained. The interaction effect of grinder and operator explained 18% of the variability. In the wheel wear test, the equivalent hand–arm-weighted accelerations for Grinder 1 during the first and second grinding minutes were 3.4 and 2.9 m s−2, respectively, and for Grinder 2, they were 3.1 and 2.9 m s−2, respectively. For Grinder 1, the equivalent hand–arm-weighted acceleration during the first grinding minute was significantly higher (P = 0.04) than during the second minute.Conclusions: Work posture during grinding operations does not appear to affect the level of HAV. Grinding wheels explained much of the variability in this study, but almost 40% of the variance remained unexplained. The considerable variability in the equivalent hand–arm-weighted acceleration has an impact on the risk assessment at both the group and the individual level. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]