• 한국산업보건학회지
• /
• 제4권2호
• /
• pp.224-239
• /
• 1994

본 연구는 1993년 10월부터 1994년 3월 사이에 PCE를 세정제로 사용하는 세탁소중 충청권에 있는 23개소의 세탁소 작업자 30명을 폭로군으로, 모대학교 사무직원 42명을 비폭로군으로 하여 자각증상을 조사하였고, 세탁소 작업자의 PCE 폭로농도 및 작업장 기중농도를 측정하였다. 혈액과 뇨를 채취하여 혈액학적, 임상화학적 검사 및 뇨단백, 뇨당을 검사함으로써 PCE 폭로정도에 따른 관련성을 분석하여 다음과 같이 결과를 요약하고, 세탁소의 작업장 환경을 양호하게 관리하기 위한 몇가지 방안을 제안하고자 한다. 1. 폭로군이 비폭로군에 비해 조사항목 대부분에서 높은 자각증상 호소율을 나타냈으며, 특히 호흡기계, 심혈관계, 소화기계, 신경정신계에서 높은 자각증상을 호소했다. 개인폭로농도와 자각증상 호소율은 상호 관련성이 없었다. 2. 1일 8시간 작업시 PCE의 허용농도는 우리나라의 경우 50.0ppm, ACGIH에서는 25.0ppm으로 권장하고 있다. 조사대상 세탁소 형태별로 작업자의 PCE폭로농도는 체인본부가 16.85ppm, 일반 세탁소가 8.83ppm, 셀프-서비스점이 3.07ppm으로 나타났다. 전체적으로 세탁소 작업자의 PCE 폭로농도는 25.0ppm 이하가 19개소(82.6%)였으며, 25.0ppm 이상 측정된 세탁소는 4개소(17.4%)였고, 50.0ppm을 넘는 세탁소는 한 곳도 없었다. 이상의 결과에서 측정대상 세탁소의 작업환경 관리가 비교적 양호함을 알 수 있다. 3. PCE 기기의 가동횟수가 증가할수록 또한 작업량(세탁량)이 많아질수록 PCE 폭로정도는 증가하였다. 또 개방형 PCE 기기를 사용하는 작업자의 폭로농도는 6.18ppm, 밀폐형은 11.48ppm으로 나타났으나, 밀폐형을 사용하는 세탁소의 경우 개방형보다 작업량이 2-3배 정도 많았으며, 이 결과는 기기의 형태보다 작업량과 관계가 있는 것으로 나타났다. 4. 혈액학적 검사에서는 WBC, RBC, Hgb, Hct, MCV, MCH, MCHC, PLT 모두 정상으로 나타났으며, 혈액의 임상화학적 검사에서도 간기능, 신장기능 진단에 이용되는 GOT, GPT, ALP, U-A 및 LDH가 정상으로 나타났다. 5. 뇨단백 및 뇨당 검사에서는 대부분 정상이었고, 3명의 뇨단백이 30mg/dl 이하로 약간 배출되었으며, 뇨당은 3명이 100mg/dl 이하, 2명이 100-250mg/dl로 약간 높게 배출하였다. 이상의 결과에서 PCE 폭로군은 비폭로군보다 신체의 여러부분에 대해 높은 자각증상 호소율을 나타냈다. 조사대상 세탁소의 작업환경은 비교적 양호하게 관리되고 있었으며, 혈액학적 및 임상화학적 검사는 직업성으로 인해 이상이 유발되었다고 평가할만한 사실은 관찰되지 않았다. 그러나 세탁소에서는 PCE뿐만 아니라 얼룩을 제거하기 위하여 여러 종류의 유기용제를 사용하기 때문에 작업자들은 항상 위해한 환경 인자에 노출되고 있다고 사료되므로, 작업장 환경을 보다 쾌적하게 관리하기 위해서는 PCE의 기계적 누출을 조사하고, 의류의 충분한 건조, 적절하고 합리적인 환풍기의 가동 및 개인보호구 착용 등에 관심을 기울여야 할 것이다.

• 한국환경보건학회지
• /
• 제40권6호
• /
• pp.454-468
• /
• 2014

Objectives: This study was conducted to investigate the actual condition of the farm work environment and personal protective equipment as part of the effort to improve livestock work for the safety and health of poultry farmers and provide basic data for establishing plans to improve and develop personal protective equipment. Methods: For this purpose, a questionnaire survey on general information about stables, the poultry work environment, accidents, the wearing of work clothes and personal protective equipment, and the level of awareness related to personal protective equipment was conducted among 148 poultry farmers. Results: As a result, it was found that poultry workplace environment was exposed to such risks as fine dusts; organic dusts; poisonous gases; odorous substances; chicken excrement; contact with chickens, bacteria or viruses; and accidents related to machine operation. Thirteen percent of respondents suffered severe respiratory diseases, and the most frequently injured sites due to accidents were the hands (25.7%), knees (23.8%), arms (17.3%), and head (10.9%). The most frequent type of accident was collisions between the body and obstacles or machinery during movement (36.4%), followed by erroneous machine operation such as feeders and electric shocks (8.5%). Regarding the wearing of work clothes and personal protective equipment, 51.7% of the respondents wore worn-out clothing or everyday clothes, whereas only 32.0% wore work clothes. The percentage of farmers who wore proper protective equipment for the work environment during poultry work was 48.4%. The most frequently used type of protective equipment was boots (38.9%), followed by mask (36.7%), gloves (36.3%), appropriate work clothes (22.6%), quarantine clothes (17.6%), helmets (13.4%), and goggles (12.6%). The rate of wearing goggles was low because they were considered inconvenient and lowered work efficiency. Furthermore, they purchased everyday products available on the market for their personal protective equipment which were not appropriate for maintaining safety in an actual harmful environment and its consequent risks. As a result of the survey of the awareness level related to personal protective equipment, their levels of awareness of accidents and attitude proved to be average or higher, but the practice of wearing protective equipment and the level of knowledge and management of personal protective equipment were lower. Conclusion: This survey found that the wearing status of personal protective equipment among poultry farmers was insufficient even though they were exposed to risks. Most respondents were aware of the necessity of wearing personal protective equipment and of the potential for accidents, but they did not wear proper protective equipment. Their wearing rate was low due to a lack of knowledge about protective equipment, as well as the inconvenience of wearing it. Therefore there is a need to improve and develop specialized personal protective equipment for respiration, hands, and eyes, as well as work clothes that can protect farmers from major harmful matter that is generated in the poultry workplace. Based on the results of this investigation, we will conduct further studies on the required performance and design directions of personal protective equipment while collecting more objective data through field-oriented assessments.

• 대한치과기공학회지
• /
• 제33권1호
• /
• pp.93-102
• /
• 2011

Purpose: The study aimed to evaluate working environment for dental technician by measuring dust level, ventilation conditions and the use of personal protective equipment and to provide basic information required to improve working environment and develop health education programs for dental technician. Methods: A total of 240 dental technician who are registered with the Daegu Association of Dental technician and working at 34 dental laboratories participated in the study. And the dust level was measured at 21 different spots in 16 dental laboratories out of 34. Results: Of 34 dental laboratories, 31 (91.2%) were equipped with a ventilator, but the remaining 3 (8.8%) did not have a ventilator. By the number of ventilator, 1 to 3 ventilators were found in 22 dental laboratories (71.0%), 4 to 6 ventilators were in 7 laboratories (22.5%) and more than 7 ventilators in 2 laboratories(6.5%). According to the frequence of changing filters in dust collector, 20 dental laboratories (58.9%) changed filters every four weeks, 10 laboratories (29.4%) changed them every six weeks and 4 laboratories (11.7%) changed them every eight weeks. Of total respondents, 114 (61.3%) said they wore a mask all the time while working, 56 (29.6%) said they frequently wore a mask, 19 (10.1%) said they did not wear a mask. As for the type of masks, 159 (84.1%) used a disposable mask, 25 (13.2%) used a cotton mask and 5 (2.7%) used an anti-dust mask. For dust sat on their outfits while working, 102 (54.0%) shook their uniforms inside workplace to keep dust off the uniforms, 64 (33.9%) did not anything until they wash their uniforms and 23 (12.1%) shook their uniforms outside workplace to keep dust off the uniforms. Of total respondents, 182 (96.3%) had a particle in their eyes while carrying out grinding work. Based on the measurement of floating dust at workplace, 3 dental laboratories showed dust concentration exceeding the minimum level of 10 mg/$m^3$ allowed under the permit for environment. Of those, 1 laboratory had the dust concentration that was more than 1.5 times higher than the minimum level. Dust concentration was higher in laboratories that used a dust collector with 0.5 horse power and changed filters more than 3 weeks ago. Dust comprised of nickel (more than 70%), chrome (9%) and others. The mean chrome concentration was more than twice higher than the minimum permissible level of 0.5 mg/$m^3$. There were two laboratories that showed chrome concentration exceeding the level of 0.4 mg/$m^3$. Like dust concentration, chrome level was higher in laboratories that used a dust collector with 0.5 horse power and changed filters more than 3 weeks ago. There were six laboratories that had nickel concentration exceeding the minimum permissible level of 1 mg/$m^3$. Of those, one laboratory had nickel concentration that was more than three times higher than the minimum permissible level. Nickel concentration was also higher in laboratories that used a dust collector with 0.5 horse power and changed filters more than 3 weeks ago. Conclusion: It is not likely that heavy metal concentrations found in the study constitute respiratory dust. It is however necessary for health of dental technician to apply the Industrial Safety and Healthy Law to dental laboratories and make recommendations for the use of personal protective equipment, installation of a proper number of ventilators, more frequent change of filters in dust collector and improved ventilation for polishing work. At the same time, dental technician need education on how to use personal protective equipment and how to efficiently remove dust from their uniforms.