Rojas-Martini M, Squillante G, Espinoza C

Language: Spanish
References: 12
Page: 413-421
PDF size: 59.82 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Objective. To identify occupational exposure to hazards among Venezuelan university (UN) workers. Material and Methods. A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted in 1999 to assess occupational exposure among UN workers. Potentially hazardous events (PH) and their causes were identified. The study population consisted of 90 workers of both genders, working in any of the 24 areas classified as critical by university authorities. Work area and individual surveys were carried out. Data collected included demographic characteristics, occupational clinical history, hazardous occupational exposures, use of personal protection equipment, and knowledge about occupational risks and habits. Clinical-toxicological tests were performed. The major chemical, physical, biological, mechanical, and ergonomic PH were identified, as well as the degree of risk (DR) for each area. Central tendency and dispersion measures were calculated, in addition to association and statistical significance measures, as appropriate. Results. A positive, significant correlation was found between time working in the university and the number of signs and symptoms reported by workers. No correlation was found between the number of signs and symptoms and age and gender. Symptoms were mainly non-specific. Conclusions. There are several potentially hazardous processes in the different occupational areas of the university. Recommendations are issued to implement prevention programs with appropriate recording of occupational accidents, and morbidity and mortality, to aid in the timely detection of occupational illnesses and accidents.

REFERENCES

1. Emery R, Declos G, Cooper S, Hardi R. Evaluating the relative status of health and safety programs for minority academic and research institutions. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 1998;59:882-888.

2. Hornsby P, Reeve R, Gwaltney J, Parson B, Morse RM. The University of Virginia Health Promotion and Disease Prevention Program. Am J Prev Med 1997;13(1):36-44.

3. Christman E, Gandsman E. Radiation safety as part of a comprehensive university occupational health and safety program. Health Phys Soc 1994;66(5):581-584.

4. LOPCYMAT. Ley Orgánica de Prevención, Condiciones y Medio Ambiente de Trabajo. Congreso de la República de Venezuela. Gaceta official No. 3850, 18-7-1986.

5. Omaña E. Sistema de vigilancia de las condiciones de trabajo y de la salud de los trabajadores. Impacto de los cambios normativos y políticos en Venezuela. Simposio de la Red de Estudios del Trabajo; 1999 Julio 26- 30; San Antonio de los Altos, Venezuela.

6. Martínez C, Omaña E. Sistemas de información en salud ocupacional. Reunión Andina en Salud de los Trabajadores. La Paz, Bolivia, 1994:67-71.

7. Niland J. Industrial Hygiene. En: Carl Zenz, ed. Occupational Medicine. Third Edition. St. Louis (MO): Editorial Mosby, 1994:1012-1060.

8. Barret CJ, Vainio H, Peakall D, Goldstein B. 12th Meeting of the scientific group on methodologies for the safety evaluation of chemicals: Susceptibility to environmental hazards. Environ Health Perspect 1997;105(4): 699-737.

9. Betancourt O. Para la enseñanza e investigación de la salud y seguridad en el trabajo. Quito:FUNSAD-OPS/OMS, 1999.

10. Alfonzo L. Condiciones y medio ambiente de trabajo en las unidades de información universitarias: caso UCV (tesis).Caracas: Universidad Central de Venezuela, 1994.

11. Tennassee M. Condiciones de salud de los trabajadores del area andina. Reunión Andina en Salud de los Trabajadores. La Paz, Bolivia, 1994: 25-39.

12. Axelson O, Hogstedt CH. The health effects of solvents. En: Carl Zenz, ed. Occupational Medicine. Third Edition. St. Louis (MO): Editorial Mosby, 1994:764-778.