四家南非制造和公用事业公司的噪音风险评估实践。

IF 1 Q3 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY
Oscar Rikhotso, Thabiso J Morodi, Daniel M Masekameni
{"title":"四家南非制造和公用事业公司的噪音风险评估实践。","authors":"Oscar Rikhotso, Thabiso J Morodi, Daniel M Masekameni","doi":"10.4102/sajcd.v70i1.996","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong> The South African Noise Induced Hearing Loss (NIHL) Regulations, mandates employers to conduct a noise risk assessment, which records specific variables for determining the status of exposure and the need for implementation of control measures.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong> The study evaluated company noise risk assessment practices for alignment with legal requirements and specific risk assessment guidelines.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong> Convenience sampling was used to select the four manufacturing and utilities companies that participated in the study. The participating companies submitted latest noise risk assessment records for evaluation through the READ approach.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong> The noise risk assessment records of three of the four companies omitted the recording of factors such as the reasonable deterioration in or failure of control measures, adequate control and formalisation of hearing conservation programmes (HCPs). When evaluated against the South African National Standard 31000 Risk Assessment guidelines, the risk assessment processes of the respective companies were lacking in addressing aspects related to establishing communication and consultation, evaluation, adapting, continually improving, leadership and commitment, and integration.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong> The recorded information on the noise risk assessment reports from the four participating companies were incomplete, negatively affecting subsequent HCP management processes and decision-making. Future studies should investigate other aspects such as the implementation status of recommended noise controls as well as their effectiveness as recorded in the noise risk assessment records.Contribution: This study provided firsthand insights of company noise risk assessment practices, specifically identifying functional and technical areas requiring improvement to enhance current efforts directed towards the minimisation of NIHL within HCPs. The study highlighted that the current practices on recording noise risk assessment information remain incomplete, adversely diminishing the impact of the assessment as an important decision-making tool. The identified technical issues specifically, when addressed, will increase trust on the decisions derived from noise risk assessments.</p>","PeriodicalId":44003,"journal":{"name":"SOUTH AFRICAN JOURNAL OF COMMUNICATION DISORDERS","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10696616/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Noise risk assessment practices of four South African manufacturing and utilities companies.\",\"authors\":\"Oscar Rikhotso, Thabiso J Morodi, Daniel M Masekameni\",\"doi\":\"10.4102/sajcd.v70i1.996\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong> The South African Noise Induced Hearing Loss (NIHL) Regulations, mandates employers to conduct a noise risk assessment, which records specific variables for determining the status of exposure and the need for implementation of control measures.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong> The study evaluated company noise risk assessment practices for alignment with legal requirements and specific risk assessment guidelines.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong> Convenience sampling was used to select the four manufacturing and utilities companies that participated in the study. The participating companies submitted latest noise risk assessment records for evaluation through the READ approach.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong> The noise risk assessment records of three of the four companies omitted the recording of factors such as the reasonable deterioration in or failure of control measures, adequate control and formalisation of hearing conservation programmes (HCPs). When evaluated against the South African National Standard 31000 Risk Assessment guidelines, the risk assessment processes of the respective companies were lacking in addressing aspects related to establishing communication and consultation, evaluation, adapting, continually improving, leadership and commitment, and integration.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong> The recorded information on the noise risk assessment reports from the four participating companies were incomplete, negatively affecting subsequent HCP management processes and decision-making. Future studies should investigate other aspects such as the implementation status of recommended noise controls as well as their effectiveness as recorded in the noise risk assessment records.Contribution: This study provided firsthand insights of company noise risk assessment practices, specifically identifying functional and technical areas requiring improvement to enhance current efforts directed towards the minimisation of NIHL within HCPs. The study highlighted that the current practices on recording noise risk assessment information remain incomplete, adversely diminishing the impact of the assessment as an important decision-making tool. The identified technical issues specifically, when addressed, will increase trust on the decisions derived from noise risk assessments.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44003,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"SOUTH AFRICAN JOURNAL OF COMMUNICATION DISORDERS\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10696616/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"SOUTH AFRICAN JOURNAL OF COMMUNICATION DISORDERS\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4102/sajcd.v70i1.996\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SOUTH AFRICAN JOURNAL OF COMMUNICATION DISORDERS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4102/sajcd.v70i1.996","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:南非噪音引起的听力损失(NIHL)法规要求雇主进行噪音风险评估,记录特定变量,以确定暴露状态和实施控制措施的必要性。目的:本研究评估了公司噪音风险评估实践与法律要求和具体风险评估指南的一致性。方法:采用方便抽样法选取参与研究的四家制造业和公用事业公司。参与公司提交最新的噪音风险评估记录,以READ方法进行评估。结果:4家企业中有3家企业的噪声风险评价记录遗漏了控制措施的合理恶化或失效、控制的充分和听力保护方案的正规化等因素的记录。在对照南非国家标准31000风险评估指南进行评估时,各公司的风险评估过程在建立沟通和咨询、评估、适应、持续改进、领导和承诺以及整合等方面缺乏解决方案。结论:四家参与企业的噪声风险评估报告记录信息不完整,对后续HCP管理流程和决策产生不利影响。未来的研究应调查其他方面,例如建议的噪音控制措施的实施情况,以及噪音风险评估记录中所记录的噪音控制措施的有效性。贡献:本研究提供了公司噪音风险评估实践的第一手见解,特别是确定了需要改进的功能和技术领域,以加强当前针对最小化HCPs内NIHL的努力。该研究强调,目前记录噪音风险评估信息的做法仍然不完整,不利地削弱了评估作为重要决策工具的影响。确定的具体技术问题,如果得到解决,将增加对噪声风险评估得出的决策的信任。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Noise risk assessment practices of four South African manufacturing and utilities companies.

Background:  The South African Noise Induced Hearing Loss (NIHL) Regulations, mandates employers to conduct a noise risk assessment, which records specific variables for determining the status of exposure and the need for implementation of control measures.

Objectives:  The study evaluated company noise risk assessment practices for alignment with legal requirements and specific risk assessment guidelines.

Method:  Convenience sampling was used to select the four manufacturing and utilities companies that participated in the study. The participating companies submitted latest noise risk assessment records for evaluation through the READ approach.

Results:  The noise risk assessment records of three of the four companies omitted the recording of factors such as the reasonable deterioration in or failure of control measures, adequate control and formalisation of hearing conservation programmes (HCPs). When evaluated against the South African National Standard 31000 Risk Assessment guidelines, the risk assessment processes of the respective companies were lacking in addressing aspects related to establishing communication and consultation, evaluation, adapting, continually improving, leadership and commitment, and integration.

Conclusion:  The recorded information on the noise risk assessment reports from the four participating companies were incomplete, negatively affecting subsequent HCP management processes and decision-making. Future studies should investigate other aspects such as the implementation status of recommended noise controls as well as their effectiveness as recorded in the noise risk assessment records.Contribution: This study provided firsthand insights of company noise risk assessment practices, specifically identifying functional and technical areas requiring improvement to enhance current efforts directed towards the minimisation of NIHL within HCPs. The study highlighted that the current practices on recording noise risk assessment information remain incomplete, adversely diminishing the impact of the assessment as an important decision-making tool. The identified technical issues specifically, when addressed, will increase trust on the decisions derived from noise risk assessments.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
SOUTH AFRICAN JOURNAL OF COMMUNICATION DISORDERS
SOUTH AFRICAN JOURNAL OF COMMUNICATION DISORDERS AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY-
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
36.40%
发文量
37
审稿时长
30 weeks
×
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