Accident Experiences and Reporting Practices in Canadian Chemistry and Biochemistry Laboratories: A Pilot Investigation

IF 2.9 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
A. Dana Ménard*, Emma Flynn, Kendall Soucie, John F. Trant
{"title":"Accident Experiences and Reporting Practices in Canadian Chemistry and Biochemistry Laboratories: A Pilot Investigation","authors":"A. Dana Ménard*,&nbsp;Emma Flynn,&nbsp;Kendall Soucie,&nbsp;John F. Trant","doi":"10.1021/acs.chas.1c00070","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p >Accidents in chemistry and biochemistry laboratories are a regular occurrence and have been associated with injuries, property damage, and deaths. However, despite a high prevalence rate of accident involvement reported in previous investigations of academic lab personnel (approximately 30%), little is known about the context in which academic lab accidents occur. Previous findings also suggest a high degree of accident underreporting (25–40%), but again, little is known about this phenomenon. Pilot data was gathered from a convenience sample of 104 students and postdoctoral fellows in chemistry-related fields through an online survey. Results showed a high level of accident involvement (56.7%); of that number, most of those (65.9%) had been involved in multiple accidents. Most accidents involved only personal injuries and happened on a weekday afternoon with other lab members present. The majority of participants reported wearing multiple types of PPE at the time; however, adherence rates for any one type of equipment (e.g., goggles, gloves, coat) was less than 50%. Most (69.6%) reported their accidents to multiple individuals and were at least somewhat or very satisfied (81.2%) with their decision to report. Participants who chose not to report their accidents reported barriers such as beliefs that the accident was not severe, concerns about judgment, self-blame, and not knowing they had to report the accident or how. Implications for safety training and reporting practices are considered.</p>","PeriodicalId":12,"journal":{"name":"ACS Chemical Health & Safety","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Chemical Health & Safety","FirstCategoryId":"1","ListUrlMain":"https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.chas.1c00070","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Accidents in chemistry and biochemistry laboratories are a regular occurrence and have been associated with injuries, property damage, and deaths. However, despite a high prevalence rate of accident involvement reported in previous investigations of academic lab personnel (approximately 30%), little is known about the context in which academic lab accidents occur. Previous findings also suggest a high degree of accident underreporting (25–40%), but again, little is known about this phenomenon. Pilot data was gathered from a convenience sample of 104 students and postdoctoral fellows in chemistry-related fields through an online survey. Results showed a high level of accident involvement (56.7%); of that number, most of those (65.9%) had been involved in multiple accidents. Most accidents involved only personal injuries and happened on a weekday afternoon with other lab members present. The majority of participants reported wearing multiple types of PPE at the time; however, adherence rates for any one type of equipment (e.g., goggles, gloves, coat) was less than 50%. Most (69.6%) reported their accidents to multiple individuals and were at least somewhat or very satisfied (81.2%) with their decision to report. Participants who chose not to report their accidents reported barriers such as beliefs that the accident was not severe, concerns about judgment, self-blame, and not knowing they had to report the accident or how. Implications for safety training and reporting practices are considered.

Abstract Image

加拿大化学和生物化学实验室的事故经验和报告实践:一项试点调查
化学和生物化学实验室中的事故经常发生,并与伤害、财产损失和死亡有关。然而,尽管在先前的学术实验室人员调查中报道了事故发生率很高(约30%),但对学术实验室事故发生的背景知之甚少。先前的研究结果也表明,事故漏报的程度很高(25-40%),但同样,对这一现象知之甚少。试点数据是通过在线调查从104名化学相关领域的学生和博士后中收集的。结果显示:高水平的事故卷入(56.7%);其中,大多数人(65.9%)涉及多次事故。大多数事故只涉及人身伤害,发生在工作日的下午,有其他实验室成员在场。大多数参与者报告同时佩戴多种类型的个人防护装备;然而,任何一种设备(如护目镜、手套、外套)的依从率都低于50%。大多数人(69.6%)向多人报告了他们的事故,并且至少对他们的报告决定有些满意或非常满意(81.2%)。选择不报告事故的参与者报告了障碍,如认为事故并不严重,担心判断,自责,不知道他们必须报告事故或如何报告。考虑了对安全培训和报告实践的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
ACS Chemical Health & Safety
ACS Chemical Health & Safety PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
20.00%
发文量
63
期刊介绍: The Journal of Chemical Health and Safety focuses on news, information, and ideas relating to issues and advances in chemical health and safety. The Journal of Chemical Health and Safety covers up-to-the minute, in-depth views of safety issues ranging from OSHA and EPA regulations to the safe handling of hazardous waste, from the latest innovations in effective chemical hygiene practices to the courts'' most recent rulings on safety-related lawsuits. The Journal of Chemical Health and Safety presents real-world information that health, safety and environmental professionals and others responsible for the safety of their workplaces can put to use right away, identifying potential and developing safety concerns before they do real harm.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信