用混合方法评估农民工对工作场所是否符合工人保护标准的看法以及对风险认知和保护行为的影响。

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Journal of Agromedicine Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-01-29 DOI:10.1080/1059924X.2024.2307483
Carly Hyland, Lisa Meierotto, Rebecca L Som Castellano, Cynthia L Curl
{"title":"用混合方法评估农民工对工作场所是否符合工人保护标准的看法以及对风险认知和保护行为的影响。","authors":"Carly Hyland, Lisa Meierotto, Rebecca L Som Castellano, Cynthia L Curl","doi":"10.1080/1059924X.2024.2307483","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)'s Worker Protection Standards is the primary set of legislation aimed at protecting farmworkers from occupational pesticide exposure in the United States. Previous studies suggest that worker adoption of Pesticide Protective Behaviors (PPBs) promoted by WPS is associated with lower urinary pesticide concentrations. However, adoption of PPBs is often outside of the control of individual farmworkers and dependent on workplace factors such as employer provisioning of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and access to trainings/resources.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a mixed-method study including urinary pesticide biomonitoring, surveys, and interviews with 62 Latinx farmworkers in southwestern Idaho from April to July 2022. We integrated findings across the various data sources to identify emergent themes relating to farmworkers' perceptions of workplace compliance with WPS and potential implications for their pesticide risk perceptions, protective behaviors, and urinary pesticide concentrations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants reported some indications of poor workplace compliance with WPS regulations, notably inconsistent access to clean handwashing stations and notification of pesticide applications. Some farmworkers, particularly pesticide applicators, viewed herbicides to be categorically safer than other classes of pesticides such as insecticides; these perceptions appeared to influence protective behaviors, such as the relatively low use of PPE while applying herbicides. These findings are underscored by the higher concentrations of biomarkers of herbicides, but not insecticides, among pesticide applicators compared with non-applicators (e.g. median 2,4-D concentrations = 1.40 µg/L among applicators and 0.69 µg/L among non-applicators). Participants further reported concerns regarding the inadequacy of pesticide safety training, pesticide drift, and the lack of communication regarding pesticide applications on and near fields where they are working.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Participants' perceptions that herbicides are categorically safer than other pesticide classes is in direct conflict with WPS training, raising concerns about discrepancies between WPS instruction and other on-the-job training, as well as the inadequate provisioning of PPE during the application of certain pesticides. Our findings also suggest that current WPS regulations may not sufficiently address farmworkers' concerns, particularly in regard to pesticide drift.</p>","PeriodicalId":49172,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agromedicine","volume":" ","pages":"355-371"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Mixed-Methods Assessment of Farmworkers' Perceptions of Workplace Compliance with Worker Protection Standards and Implications for Risk Perceptions and Protective Behaviors.\",\"authors\":\"Carly Hyland, Lisa Meierotto, Rebecca L Som Castellano, Cynthia L Curl\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/1059924X.2024.2307483\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)'s Worker Protection Standards is the primary set of legislation aimed at protecting farmworkers from occupational pesticide exposure in the United States. Previous studies suggest that worker adoption of Pesticide Protective Behaviors (PPBs) promoted by WPS is associated with lower urinary pesticide concentrations. However, adoption of PPBs is often outside of the control of individual farmworkers and dependent on workplace factors such as employer provisioning of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and access to trainings/resources.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a mixed-method study including urinary pesticide biomonitoring, surveys, and interviews with 62 Latinx farmworkers in southwestern Idaho from April to July 2022. We integrated findings across the various data sources to identify emergent themes relating to farmworkers' perceptions of workplace compliance with WPS and potential implications for their pesticide risk perceptions, protective behaviors, and urinary pesticide concentrations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants reported some indications of poor workplace compliance with WPS regulations, notably inconsistent access to clean handwashing stations and notification of pesticide applications. Some farmworkers, particularly pesticide applicators, viewed herbicides to be categorically safer than other classes of pesticides such as insecticides; these perceptions appeared to influence protective behaviors, such as the relatively low use of PPE while applying herbicides. These findings are underscored by the higher concentrations of biomarkers of herbicides, but not insecticides, among pesticide applicators compared with non-applicators (e.g. median 2,4-D concentrations = 1.40 µg/L among applicators and 0.69 µg/L among non-applicators). Participants further reported concerns regarding the inadequacy of pesticide safety training, pesticide drift, and the lack of communication regarding pesticide applications on and near fields where they are working.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Participants' perceptions that herbicides are categorically safer than other pesticide classes is in direct conflict with WPS training, raising concerns about discrepancies between WPS instruction and other on-the-job training, as well as the inadequate provisioning of PPE during the application of certain pesticides. Our findings also suggest that current WPS regulations may not sufficiently address farmworkers' concerns, particularly in regard to pesticide drift.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49172,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Agromedicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"355-371\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Agromedicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/1059924X.2024.2307483\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/29 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Agromedicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1059924X.2024.2307483","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:环境保护局(EPA)的《工人保护标准》是美国旨在保护农场工人避免职业性农药接触的主要立法。以往的研究表明,工人采用 WPS 所提倡的农药保护行为(PPBs)与降低尿液中的农药浓度有关。然而,采用 PPBs 通常不受农场工人个人的控制,而是取决于工作场所的因素,如雇主提供的个人防护设备(PPE)和获得培训/资源的机会:2022 年 4 月至 7 月,我们对爱达荷州西南部的 62 名拉美裔农民工进行了一项混合方法研究,包括尿液杀虫剂生物监测、调查和访谈。我们整合了各种数据来源的调查结果,以确定与农民工对工作场所遵守 WPS 的看法有关的新出现的主题,以及对他们的农药风险看法、保护行为和尿液农药浓度的潜在影响:结果:参与者报告了工作场所对 WPS 法规遵守不力的一些迹象,特别是清洁洗手台的使用和农药施用通知的不一致。一些农场工人,尤其是农药施用者,认为除草剂比其他类别的农药(如杀虫剂)更安全;这些看法似乎影响了他们的防护行为,如在施用除草剂时相对较少使用个人防护设备。与非施药者相比,施药者体内除草剂而非杀虫剂的生物标志物浓度更高(例如,施药者体内 2,4-D 浓度的中位数为 1.40 µg/L,而非施药者体内 2,4-D 浓度的中位数为 0.69 µg/L),这进一步证实了上述发现。参与者还对农药安全培训不足、农药漂移以及在他们工作的田地及其附近施用农药缺乏沟通等问题表示担忧:讨论:参与者认为除草剂绝对比其他类别的农药安全,这与 WPS 培训直接冲突,引起了人们对 WPS 指导与其他在职培训之间的差异,以及在施用某些农药时个人防护设备不足的担忧。我们的研究结果还表明,目前的 WPS 法规可能没有充分解决农民工的担忧,尤其是在农药漂移方面。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Mixed-Methods Assessment of Farmworkers' Perceptions of Workplace Compliance with Worker Protection Standards and Implications for Risk Perceptions and Protective Behaviors.

Introduction: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)'s Worker Protection Standards is the primary set of legislation aimed at protecting farmworkers from occupational pesticide exposure in the United States. Previous studies suggest that worker adoption of Pesticide Protective Behaviors (PPBs) promoted by WPS is associated with lower urinary pesticide concentrations. However, adoption of PPBs is often outside of the control of individual farmworkers and dependent on workplace factors such as employer provisioning of Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and access to trainings/resources.

Methods: We conducted a mixed-method study including urinary pesticide biomonitoring, surveys, and interviews with 62 Latinx farmworkers in southwestern Idaho from April to July 2022. We integrated findings across the various data sources to identify emergent themes relating to farmworkers' perceptions of workplace compliance with WPS and potential implications for their pesticide risk perceptions, protective behaviors, and urinary pesticide concentrations.

Results: Participants reported some indications of poor workplace compliance with WPS regulations, notably inconsistent access to clean handwashing stations and notification of pesticide applications. Some farmworkers, particularly pesticide applicators, viewed herbicides to be categorically safer than other classes of pesticides such as insecticides; these perceptions appeared to influence protective behaviors, such as the relatively low use of PPE while applying herbicides. These findings are underscored by the higher concentrations of biomarkers of herbicides, but not insecticides, among pesticide applicators compared with non-applicators (e.g. median 2,4-D concentrations = 1.40 µg/L among applicators and 0.69 µg/L among non-applicators). Participants further reported concerns regarding the inadequacy of pesticide safety training, pesticide drift, and the lack of communication regarding pesticide applications on and near fields where they are working.

Discussion: Participants' perceptions that herbicides are categorically safer than other pesticide classes is in direct conflict with WPS training, raising concerns about discrepancies between WPS instruction and other on-the-job training, as well as the inadequate provisioning of PPE during the application of certain pesticides. Our findings also suggest that current WPS regulations may not sufficiently address farmworkers' concerns, particularly in regard to pesticide drift.

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
Journal of Agromedicine
Journal of Agromedicine PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH-
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
20.80%
发文量
84
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Agromedicine: Practice, Policy, and Research publishes translational research, reports and editorials related to agricultural health, safety and medicine. The Journal of Agromedicine seeks to engage the global agricultural health and safety community including rural health care providers, agricultural health and safety practitioners, academic researchers, government agencies, policy makers, and others. The Journal of Agromedicine is committed to providing its readers with relevant, rigorously peer-reviewed, original articles. The journal welcomes high quality submissions as they relate to agricultural health and safety in the areas of: • Behavioral and Mental Health • Climate Change • Education/Training • Emerging Practices • Environmental Public Health • Epidemiology • Ergonomics • Injury Prevention • Occupational and Industrial Health • Pesticides • Policy • Safety Interventions and Evaluation • Technology
×
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