霍婷婷, 商懿, 郭梅. 四种职业健康风险评估方法在无机颜料制造业中的运用与结果比较[J]. 职业卫生与应急救援, 2020, 38(4): 346-351. DOI: 10.16369/j.oher.issn.1007-1326.2020.04.006
引用本文: 霍婷婷, 商懿, 郭梅. 四种职业健康风险评估方法在无机颜料制造业中的运用与结果比较[J]. 职业卫生与应急救援, 2020, 38(4): 346-351. DOI: 10.16369/j.oher.issn.1007-1326.2020.04.006
HUO Tingting, SHANG Yi, GUO Mei. Application and comparison of four occupational health risk assessment methods in inorganic pigment manufacturing industry[J]. Occupational Health and Emergency Rescue, 2020, 38(4): 346-351. DOI: 10.16369/j.oher.issn.1007-1326.2020.04.006
Citation: HUO Tingting, SHANG Yi, GUO Mei. Application and comparison of four occupational health risk assessment methods in inorganic pigment manufacturing industry[J]. Occupational Health and Emergency Rescue, 2020, 38(4): 346-351. DOI: 10.16369/j.oher.issn.1007-1326.2020.04.006

四种职业健康风险评估方法在无机颜料制造业中的运用与结果比较

Application and comparison of four occupational health risk assessment methods in inorganic pigment manufacturing industry

  • 摘要:
    目的 应用4种风险评估方法对某无机颜料制造企业进行职业健康风险评估,比较所得结果,甄选高风险岗位,为该类企业的风险评估方法的选择和风险管理提供思路。
    方法 以职业卫生现场调查、职业病危害因素检测结果为基础,选用国际采矿和金属委员会风险评估方法(ICMM法)、罗马尼亚职业事故和职业病风险评估方法(MLSP法)、澳大利亚职业健康与安全风险评估方法(UQ法)、新加坡半定量风险评估方法(MOM法)对该企业的职业病危害岗位进行职业健康风险评估。引入风险比值对4种方法得出的评估结果进行比较。
    结果 ICMM法得到的岗位危害风险分级为Ⅳ级(高风险)、Ⅴ级(极高风险)的占一半以上,MLSP法和MOM法得到的岗位危害风险分级均在Ⅲ级(中等风险)及以下,UQ法得到的风险分级层次分布较为均匀,总体略低于ICMM法但高于MLSP法和MOM法,与平均风险分级较为吻合。
    结论 该企业的铁皮切割、铁黑拼混研磨包装岗位的噪声,上铁、烘干线包装岗位的高温对人体的健康风险极高,应重点关注。当企业风险接受度比较低时,可选择ICMM法和UQ法;当企业风险接受度较高时,可选择MLSP法;化学因素较多的岗位可选择评价依据较为客观的MOM法。

     

    Abstract:
    Objective Taking an inorganic pigment manufacturing enterprise as an example, four occupational health risk assessment methods were applied to do risk assessment and the results were compared. The high-risk positions were identified to provide basis for choice of risk assessment and risk management methods in these enterprises.
    Methods Based on the results of both field investigation and of occupational hazards monitoring, the methods of ICMM, MLSP, MOM and UQ were used to assess the occupational health risk of occupational hazards in the enterprise. The risk ratio was introduced to compare the evaluation results of these four methods.
    Results ICMM method showed that the hazards in more than half of the positions were classified as level IV (high risk) and/or level V (extremely high risk). MLSP method and MOM method showed that the hazards in all positions were classified as lower than level III (medium risk). The risk classification level obtained by UQ method was relatively stable, and overall slightly lower than ICMM method but higher than MLSP and MOM methods, which was more consistent with the average risk classification.
    Conclusion The hazards of noise in the positions of iron sheet cutting, black iron oxide mixing, grinding and packaging, and the heat stress in the positions of the iron feeding and drying line packaging were extremely high. When risk acceptance is relatively low in the enterprise, ICMM method and/or UQ method can be selected. When risk acceptance is relatively high in the enterprise, MLSP method can be selected. MOM method, which is more objective for risk assessment, can be selected in the positions where major hazards are chemicals.

     

/

返回文章
返回