Layer | Fill | Outline |
---|
Map layers
Theme | Visible | Selectable | Appearance | Zoom Range (now: 0) |
---|
Fill | Stroke |
---|---|
Collaborating Authors
Results
Safety performance improvement is an acknowledged goal within the foundry industry and statistical measures, provided by the Bureau of Labor Statistics and others, support this priority (Schorn, 2020). In calling for improvement, this author and others have called for greater top management involvement (Marsh et al., 1998; Schorn, 2010; Smith, 2017). Indeed, it can readily be admitted that one of the factors most often noted in describing the success of improvement projects of any kind is top management support. Unfortunately, the phrase "top management support" is often ill-defined in one or more aspects and thus this agreed upon ingredient for success in improvement cannot be effectively added. Two aspects of top management support need enhanced clarity before making headway toward defining what such support might require. First, exactly who is intended in the phrase, "top management"? Second, in order to ensure that a uniform measure of success in improvement is available, the definition of safety performance must be provided.
- Management (1.00)
- Health, Safety, Environment & Sustainability > Safety > Safety risk management (1.00)
- Health, Safety, Environment & Sustainability > Safety > Human factors (engineering and behavioral aspects) (1.00)
- Health, Safety, Environment & Sustainability > HSSE & Social Responsibility Management > HSSE management systems (1.00)
Key Takeaways - Approximately 2% to 13% of the U.S. population will experience a specific phobia during their lifetime, including animal phobia, acrophobia, claustrophobia and blood-injury phobia. - Treatments from the medical and psychological fields to reduce claustrophobic reactions have included virtual and non-virtual treatments, cognitive behavioral therapy, relaxation and visualization, and pharmacological treatments. - Occupational confined space exposures include equipment and environments encountered by fire and rescue, search and extrication teams, maintenance personnel, contractors in industrial and commercial employments, and military personnel. - The findings and results of researchers studying how best to reduce claustrophobic reactions in magnetic resonance imaging machines, especially postural positions, has direct relevance to industrial and engineering designers seeking to reduce claustrophobic anxiety in industrial and construction equipment and environments. _ Individuals who cannot hold a full-facepiece respirator to their face without hyperventilating, cannot ride in a car without the windows down regardless of the weather, cannot enter storm drains, are terrified of dying and being placed in a casket, cannot be zipped up in a fully encapsulating Level A protective suit, cannot go through a 37x30-in. hatch to a marine vessel, or who refuse a magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examination are examples of the fear and anxiety caused by exposure to potentially claustrophobic environments. Their fears of restriction and suffocation are the markers for claustrophobic reactions. This article explores confined space-induced claustrophobia and training for desensitization, notes screening standards and available treatments, and offers alternatives to confined space entry.
- North America > United States (1.00)
- Europe (1.00)
- Research Report > Experimental Study (1.00)
- Research Report > New Finding (0.93)
- Law Enforcement & Public Safety (1.00)
- Law (1.00)
- Health & Medicine > Therapeutic Area > Psychiatry/Psychology (1.00)
- (5 more...)
Key Takeaways - Crisis and emergency risk communication (CERC) is an evidence-based framework that OSH professionals can use for successful risk communication to mitigate harm to people, property and the environment. - OSH professionals must introspectively reflect on lessons learned from previous emergencies and evaluate how circumstances inform the outcomes of risk communication. - Misinformation is not a new phenomenon, but it is a challenge that can be anticipated and addressed through timely, credible and transparent information provided by OSH professionals. - OSH professionals play a critical role in the preparation and execution of CERC in the workplace for all emergencies, including serious injuries and fatalities, extreme weather events and infectious disease outbreaks. _ While many OSH professionals likely grow weary of discussing matters related to the COVID-19 pandemic, this public health crisis made more apparent than ever before the obligation of OSH professionals to provide subject matter expertise and effective risk communication practices to all organizations. The newly presented hazard was microscopic, only visible through symptomatic response, and a change of pace from the more easily seen, and arguably more easily managed, occupational hazards such as working at elevated heights or confined spaces. As the primary source of information related to occupational risk management in many organizations, OSH professionals found themselves in a position of needing to communicate risk and manage organizational processes to mitigate harm to people and property, even as the hazard and potential risks were largely unknown (Loon, 2020). However, the concept of risk communication during crises and emergencies is not new, and OSH professionals can do well to use evidence-based frameworks such as the crisis and emergency risk communication (CERC) framework presented by the CDC (2018a) to better prepare for effective risk communication practices in any emergency in which they find themselves. The CERC framework helps create communication plans that establish who will speak and to whom they will speak, and ensure that communication is timely, credible and promotes appropriate action (CDC, 2018b). The aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic presents a unique opportunity for OSH professionals to reflect on lessons learned, identify gaps in current risk communication processes and establish plans for organizational success in the future.
- North America > United States (0.70)
- Asia (0.48)
- Health & Medicine > Public Health (1.00)
- Energy > Power Industry (0.94)
- Health & Medicine > Therapeutic Area > Infections and Infectious Diseases (0.91)
- (2 more...)
Key Takeaways - Little has been written about the specific aspects of servant leadership that improve an organization’s culture of safety and reduce undesirable events. One part of servant leadership—building community— holds promise in this regard. - A sense of community helps workers take on a greater leadership role within their work groups. Community is also an important part of establishing a culture of safety, as openness in communications and psychological safety are essential to be able to speak freely about safety concerns. - By comparing two organizations through a safety perception survey, this article discusses five dimensions of community and safety-related outcomes. It also describes ways that leaders can examine these dimensions in their organizations to develop a greater sense of community through safety to achieve a greater sense of mission and trust, and improve relationships, productivity and quality. _ Servant leadership was first linked to improvements in safety performance more than 25 years ago (Sarkus, 1996). The author’s insights originated from Robert Greenleaf’s leadership work (Frick & Spears, 1996; Peck, 1995), comprised of major themes such as vision, persuasion, caring, collaborating, inspiring followers to be servant leaders and building community. Greenleaf characterizes servant leadership in the following way: The servant-leader is servant first. . . . It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve, to serve first. Then conscious choice brings one to aspire to lead. . . . The difference manifests itself in the care taken by the servant—first to make sure that other people’s highest-priority needs are being served. The best test, and the most difficult to administer, is: Do those served grow as persons? Do they, while being served, become healthier, wiser, freer, more autonomous, more likely themselves to become servants? And, what is the effect on the least privileged in society, will they benefit or, at least, not be further deprived? (Greenleaf, 1970, as cited in Frick & Spears, 1996) _ From a safety performance perspective, more recently, others have validated the strength and positive outcomes of servant leadership with empirical support (Cooper, 2015). However, little seems to have been written about the specific aspects of servant leadership that improve an organization’s culture of safety, along with the reduction of undesirable events. One part of servant leadership—building community—holds promise in this regard.
Pedestrian Walkways: Hidden Hazards Related to Common Landscaping Practices
Weaver, Albert (L.A. Weaver Co. Inc.) | Ojiambo, William (L.A. Weaver Co. Inc.) | Kemp, Jessica (L.A. Weaver Co. Inc.) | Diserafino, Drew (L.A. Weaver Co. Inc.) | Simmons, Anna (L.A. Weaver Co. Inc.) | Goss, Isabella (Twilio Segment)
Key Takeaways - Sidewalk- and edging-related falls are a major cause of occupational injuries for courier and delivery occupations. According to 2020 estimates, 18,730 couriers and messengers in addition to 334,810 postal service mail carriers are working in the U.S. - Landscape edging has been determined to be the causative factor in many sidewalk fall incidents. The “open and obvious” legal doctrine is often used by both the plaintiff and defense in landscape injury lawsuits. - Lacerations and fracture injuries from falls onto landscape edging are common for humans and pets. The populations with the greatest injury rates from landscape edging contact are the toddler through late teens age range, and the over 65 group. _ Landscape edging has caused injuries to people from tripping or lacerations due to the sharp edging sometimes protruding from the ground. In some cases, these incidents lead to lawsuits and economic losses when people who come onto a property, whether invited or not, feel they were not appropriately warned or protected from the hazard. Frederick Law Olmsted, considered the father of U.S. landscape architecture, was known for designing the landscapes of Central Park in New York City and the Biltmore house and its 125,000-acre estate near Asheville, NC. Now, some areas of both Central Park and the Biltmore Estate are edged while other areas have no edging. Even prior to Olmsted’s work, gardening practices used edging materials in the 18th and 19th centuries. These edgings were typically constructed using plants such as boxwood or a material such as earthenware, stone, iron or wood (National Gallery of Art, 2021). At Monticello, built between 1767 and 1809, Thomas Jefferson marked the perimeters of garden beds using pieces of brick known as “brick bats” (National Gallery of Art, 2021). In February 1900, a patent for lawn edging was granted in the U.S. The inventor claimed that the open top gutter was composed of terra-cotta or similar material and adapted to form an edging for lawns. The accompanying patent application drawing showed a lawn on one side and an adjacent path or road on the other side (Payne, 1900). The granting of this patent began a new wave of edging in lawn care and maintenance.
- Law (1.00)
- Government > Regional Government > North America Government > United States Government (1.00)
- Health & Medicine > Therapeutic Area (0.93)
Exploring Perceptions of U.S. Healthcare & Public Safety Workers at the Onset of the COVID-19 Pandemic
Haas, Emily J. (NIOSH National Personal Protective Technology Laboratory (NPPTL)) | Casey, Megan L. (NIOSH National Personal Protective Technology Laboratory (NPPTL)) | Furek, Alexa (NIOSH National Personal Protective Technology Laboratory (NPPTL)) | Moore, Susan M. (NIOSH National Personal Protective Technology Laboratory (NPPTL))
Key Takeaways - Results identified differences in occupational sectors and work groups regarding perceived risks toward contracting SARS-CoV-2, efficacy to mitigate exposure risks and confidence in the efficacy of PPE during the pandemic. - Previous experience in using PPE by way of job occupation has a significant impact on workers’ confidence in the ability of their PPE to protect them from exposure to SARS-CoV-2. - Role modeling behaviors of management as well as their enforcement of safety and health plans, including the use of PPE, is necessary to garner employee-wide participation in health-protective behaviors. There is a gap in research associated with emerging infectious diseases and the role that individual perceptions have on attitudes and health-protective behaviors. NIOSH researchers sought to understand healthcare and emergency medical services (EMS) workers’ perceived risks toward SARS-CoV-2 and what factors may significantly influence subsequent health-protective behaviors. Between March and May 2020, 122 healthcare and EMS workers completed an assessment on a mobile safety application provided by their workplace. The results inform organizational practices regarding COVID-19 information sharing. First, it is important that all employees have access to information about respiratory protection as well as organizational resources such as their updated respiratory protection plans that may influence health-protective behaviors at work. Second, messaging for employees with individualistic attitudes may significantly differ and more research should be done to determine whether science-based consensus messages are the most effective risk communication strategy. Introduction SARS-CoV-2 and the disease it causes, COVID-19, may put some frontline workers who are employed in healthcare and first responder settings at risk of infection (CDC, 2020a; The Lancet, 2020; Maguire et al., 2020). Although an unknown proportion of these cases may be community-acquired, as of Jan. 13, 2022, the CDC (2020b) had confirmed 852,460 COVID-19 cases among healthcare personnel and 3,385 deaths. Also, prehospital care such as ambulatory calls that require response from firefighters and EMS has increased in population-dense locations. In areas within New York, NY, for example, the number of incident calls received have almost doubled, with dispatchers taking more than 7,000 calls per day (Pilgrim et al., 2020; Watkins, 2020). Further, in more rural or suburban areas such as Springfield, MO, emergency calls increased up to 10% in 2021 (Van Schoik, 2022), continuing to put these workers at risk of exposure to SARS-CoV-2. Along with the inconsistencies in the availability of PPE for healthcare and EMS personnel early in the COVID-19 pandemic, these workers have experienced significant uncertainty and stress (Kamerow, 2020; WHO, 2020).
- Research Report > New Finding (0.96)
- Questionnaire & Opinion Survey (0.68)
- Health & Medicine > Therapeutic Area > Infections and Infectious Diseases (1.00)
- Health & Medicine > Therapeutic Area > Immunology > HIV (0.46)
- Health, Safety, Environment & Sustainability > Health > Infectious diseases (HIV/AIDS, malaria, tuberculosis) (0.89)
- Health, Safety, Environment & Sustainability > Health > Exposure assessment (0.74)
- Health, Safety, Environment & Sustainability > HSSE & Social Responsibility Management > Contingency planning and emergency response (0.66)
Key Takeaways - The concepts encapsulated in terms that organizations use to convey their safety and health values and systems can be confounded, misunderstood and misapplied by conceptual noise from different sources. Conceptual noise is the ambiguity resulting from unclear, inconsistent, competing, or contradictory verbal and written communications. - Organizations need to systematically identify, eliminate or control such conceptual noise sources to ensure workforce understanding, acceptance and usage. - A safety terminology management program is the management system for achieving these objectives. This article analyzes the reasons for mastering (i.e., systematically managing) an organization’s safety and health concepts and terms, and describes how it is to be accomplished. For brevity and readability, the term “occupational safety and health” has been shortened to simply “safety.” Thus, “safety management program” is used for “occupational health and safety program,” and “safety management system” is used for “occupational safety and health management system.” Safety Terminology Management All professions and organizations use specialized words and expressions to communicate conceptual meaning and context to stakeholders. These specialized designations are called terms. Terminology is the word designation for the collection and study of terms. Terminology management is the process of identifying, evaluating, organizing, communicating, and controlling terms and their specialized meanings. The process applied to an organization’s occupational safety and health concepts comprises its safety terminology management program. Such a program is an essential, yet largely neglected, element of most safety management systems. Since safety and health terms are used daily and in numerous organizational documents, many safety leaders simply assume that their meanings are self-evident and are clearly understood by the workforce. Few leaders recognize the need to verify these assumptions, much less incorporate a safety terminology management program into their organization’s safety management system. An organization’s specialized terms convey particular import and context for its safety culture and safety management system. No system (natural or created) can function effectively if its operating principles are confounded by unclear, inconsistent or mixed signals. The U.S. response to the COVID-19 pandemic is an example of how the conceptual noise from mixed signals can cause misperceptions and mistrust, leading to unwanted and unhealthy behaviors.
- Energy > Power Industry (0.93)
- Education > Educational Setting > Online (0.93)
- Health & Medicine > Consumer Health (0.69)
- (2 more...)
Key Takeaways - While the literature has shown a systematic relationship between situational and person-based OSH, research that directly compares the relative effects of personal versus situational factors in driving worker safety behavior is lacking from the literature and from any industry, including mining. - Using survey data collected in the mining industry across North America, researchers examined the relative importance of situational and personal constructs in predicting worker behavior. - Situational factors were found to be significant and, therefore, a disciplined focus on occupational health and safety management systems (OHSMS) and building a strong safety climate/culture should never be overlooked. - However, surprisingly, person-based factors were a larger driver of OSH behavior in the mining industry. This stresses the importance of OHSMS that build in practices and processes to address the person and not just to stress the priority of safety (i.e., safety climate). Safety climate is often studied and referenced as a leading indicator of incidents (Beus et al., 2010; Haas & Yorio, 2016; Mearns et al., 2001) and must be considered within any occupational health and safety management system (OHSMS; National Research Council, 2013). Further, the consideration of safety climate and attending to employee attitudes and values becomes more important as lagging indicators plateau (Reason, 2008; 2016). This trend has become the case within the mining industry worldwide, which has seen dramatic reductions in severe incidents and fatalities. Safety climate and safety culture have distinctions that make them unique, yet the terms are often used interchangeably, both in the literature and in practice (Cox & Flin, 1998). However, safety climate provides an understanding of the current safety conditions and insights into areas that can be addressed (Curcuruto & Griffin, 2018). In other words, safety climate can be more readily measured to improve safety behaviors. This study focused on safety climate rather than culture to provide targeted feedback into what aspects of an organization’s climate can be developed or more effectively implemented through an OHSMS. Generally, safety climate is measured to provide benchmarks for improvement. However, identifying and implementing tangible methods to improve an organization’s safety climate is not well understood, particularly in organizations whose environments constantly change. In the current study, the authors argue that determining this derived or relative importance may be a valuable insight to empirically guide management decisions. To advance a more tangible understanding of safety climate and its impact on organizational strategy, NIOSH surveyed members of 39 mining workforces about experiences at their respective operations. The results can be used to guide how high-risk industries choose valid, high-impact indicators to prioritize decisions and improve organizational behavior while also elucidating the importance of individual-level interventions in the workplace.
- Questionnaire & Opinion Survey (0.94)
- Research Report > New Finding (0.88)
- Materials > Metals & Mining (1.00)
- Health & Medicine (1.00)
- Government > Regional Government > North America Government > United States Government (0.36)
Key Takeaways This study provides a compendium of OSH professionals’ early workplace response to SARS-CoV-2, popularly recognized as the COVID-19 pandemic. A consolidated list of practices adopted for health screenings, human interaction control, barriers, touch surfaces, cleaning and disinfecting, communication, reporting and quarantine are provided. Descriptive statistics of respondent perceptions about numerous related factors are also summarized, including response adequacy and impact to normal OSH routines. A significant association was found to exist between organization relative risk level and the frequency of pandemic planning. Statistically significant results were also found for pandemic planning and availability of PPE. On January 9, 2020, World Health Organization (WHO) alerted that a coronavirus-related pneumonia had been discovered in Wuhan, China; on March 11 it declared that a pandemic had resulted. This news was quickly followed by a U.S. national emergency declaration, subsequent travel bans, stay-at-home orders, and the shuttering of schools, universities and nonessential businesses (AJMC, 2020). Organizations of every description and the employees serving them have since attempted to learn how to coexist with a lethal virus that spreads easily between people and mainly through respiratory droplets (CDC, 2020). There is no modern playbook describing how to best proceed since the most recent comparable event was more than 100 years ago (Barry, 2004; Kolata, 2019). Misinformation abounds (Brennen et al., n.d.; Kouzy et al., 2020; Pennycook et al., 2020), while reliable data emerges erratically at best (Del Rio & Malani, 2020). Those serving as OSH professionals in innumerable workplaces have been no less challenged. Their charge is the prevention of workplace injury and illness (ASSP, 2020), yet no single approach is proven best. Even the basics of infection prevention are evolving and vary depending on the source considered (American Red Cross, n.d.; CDC, 2020; WHO, 2020a). The surest prescription by OSH professionals, of course, would be to eliminate any and all possible interactions between workers. However, such an approach proves impractical. The task, then, has been to prescribe how best to dance with a metaphorical devil such that worker infection risk is minimized as organizations continue to operate or attempt to reopen. The accepted paradigm has been that the two propositions, albeit challenged, are not mutually exclusive, although OSH professionals have had to rapidly innovate, test and revise their strategies. Learning to fly a plane even as it is being designed proves an apt analogy. Already, there are lessons to be learned. This study was undertaken to produce a baseline of OSH professional COVID-19 response, and to begin the process of capturing lessons learned. The role of pandemic planning and relative organization OSH risk were thought specifically important variables to explore.
- North America > United States (1.00)
- Asia > China > Hubei Province > Wuhan (0.24)
- Questionnaire & Opinion Survey (1.00)
- Research Report > Experimental Study (0.66)
Key Takeaways - Safety climate is a reliable predictor of workplace safety behavior and outcome. As such, exploring the safety climate of Ontario restaurants can identify key areas for improvement. - Study results suggest that perceptions of management commitment to and fairness around safety were positive, whereas perceptions of worker risk nonacceptance and safety priority could be improved. There were also significant differences between groups in categories of work position, work area and employment length. - Based on study results, actions are recommended to increase worker participation in safety and health decisions, to encourage the sharing of safety knowledge from more senior workers, to communicate the priority of safety, and to make clear that risks should not be accepted as part of the job. Restaurant workers are exposed to a wide range of safety and health hazards that can result in injuries. Between 2015 and 2018, the number of lost-time injuries increased significantly in the restaurant sector of Ontario, Canada. Given this trend, it was deemed important to examine this sector’s current safety climate because it has been shown to be a reliable predictor of safety behavior and outcome. Thus, this exploratory study aimed to understand the safety climate in Ontario restaurants and identify areas for improvement. A self-administered questionnaire was used to assess seven key safety climate dimensions such as management safety empowerment and peer safety communication/trust.
- Research Report > New Finding (1.00)
- Research Report > Experimental Study (1.00)
- Questionnaire & Opinion Survey (1.00)
- Health & Medicine (1.00)
- Consumer Products & Services > Restaurants (1.00)
- Transportation > Ground > Road (0.46)