农业雇主对职业野火烟雾规则的看法。

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q3 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Molly Parker, Janessa M Graves, Lois James, Julie Postma
{"title":"农业雇主对职业野火烟雾规则的看法。","authors":"Molly Parker, Janessa M Graves, Lois James, Julie Postma","doi":"10.1080/1059924X.2025.2465639","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The purpose of the study was to examine the perspectives of agricultural employers and managers regarding wildfire smoke-related occupational health and safety protections. The aims were to (1) explore implementation and evaluation of the Washington (WA) State Department of Labor and Industries Wildfire Smoke Rule, (2) develop a survey to explore perspectives on the rule, and (3) examine the relationship between occupational roles and knowledge and training received related to components of the rule.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used exploratory sequential mixed methods, including key informant interviews with industry stakeholders, survey design, and online survey administration to agricultural employers and managers. Thematic analysis of interviews informed survey design. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression were used to analyze survey results.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our team interviewed seven agricultural industry stakeholders. Three themes were identified: (1) competing demands and regulation fatigue, (2) workplace attitude and culture, and (3) suggestions for rule implementation and evaluation. Themes and components of the smoke rule were used to develop the survey. Of the 128 survey respondents, almost half (45.1%) reported owner or grower as their role and 39.3% reported supervisors or managers. Over half (51.6%) of respondents reported fewer than 25 employees in their workplace and 17.2% reported 250 or more employees. Respondents were from multiple WA counties and worked with various crops. Most employers and workers they supervise reported wildfire smoke exposure at work and related adverse symptoms. Almost one-third of respondents reported they had not heard of the smoke rule (33.3%). Over half of respondents have not received training on managing workers with smoke-related symptoms (53.9%). About one-third has not received training on air quality monitoring (40.0%), health effects of exposure (36.8%), and implementing protective controls (31.0%). Differences in knowledge and training on rule components by occupational role were insignificant.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Findings identify gaps in awareness and training regarding protection from wildfire smoke in the agricultural workplace, especially around symptom recognition and management. Barriers to implementing protective controls in the workplace were identified. Findings will inform targeted outreach and educational toolkits for the agricultural industry and support the development and evaluation of protective occupational health rules.</p>","PeriodicalId":49172,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Agromedicine","volume":" ","pages":"1-14"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Agricultural Employer Perspectives on Occupational Wildfire Smoke Rules.\",\"authors\":\"Molly Parker, Janessa M Graves, Lois James, Julie Postma\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/1059924X.2025.2465639\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The purpose of the study was to examine the perspectives of agricultural employers and managers regarding wildfire smoke-related occupational health and safety protections. The aims were to (1) explore implementation and evaluation of the Washington (WA) State Department of Labor and Industries Wildfire Smoke Rule, (2) develop a survey to explore perspectives on the rule, and (3) examine the relationship between occupational roles and knowledge and training received related to components of the rule.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We used exploratory sequential mixed methods, including key informant interviews with industry stakeholders, survey design, and online survey administration to agricultural employers and managers. Thematic analysis of interviews informed survey design. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression were used to analyze survey results.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our team interviewed seven agricultural industry stakeholders. Three themes were identified: (1) competing demands and regulation fatigue, (2) workplace attitude and culture, and (3) suggestions for rule implementation and evaluation. Themes and components of the smoke rule were used to develop the survey. Of the 128 survey respondents, almost half (45.1%) reported owner or grower as their role and 39.3% reported supervisors or managers. Over half (51.6%) of respondents reported fewer than 25 employees in their workplace and 17.2% reported 250 or more employees. Respondents were from multiple WA counties and worked with various crops. Most employers and workers they supervise reported wildfire smoke exposure at work and related adverse symptoms. Almost one-third of respondents reported they had not heard of the smoke rule (33.3%). Over half of respondents have not received training on managing workers with smoke-related symptoms (53.9%). About one-third has not received training on air quality monitoring (40.0%), health effects of exposure (36.8%), and implementing protective controls (31.0%). Differences in knowledge and training on rule components by occupational role were insignificant.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Findings identify gaps in awareness and training regarding protection from wildfire smoke in the agricultural workplace, especially around symptom recognition and management. Barriers to implementing protective controls in the workplace were identified. Findings will inform targeted outreach and educational toolkits for the agricultural industry and support the development and evaluation of protective occupational health rules.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49172,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Agromedicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1-14\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-18\",\"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.2025.2465639\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"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.2025.2465639","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究的目的是考察农业雇主和管理者对野火烟雾相关职业健康和安全保护的看法。目的是:(1)探索华盛顿州劳动和工业部野火烟雾规则的实施和评估,(2)开展一项调查以探索该规则的观点,以及(3)检查职业角色与所接受的与规则组成部分相关的知识和培训之间的关系。方法:采用探索性顺序混合方法,包括与行业利益相关者的关键信息访谈,调查设计,以及对农业雇主和管理者的在线调查管理。访谈的专题分析为调查设计提供信息。采用描述性统计和逻辑回归对调查结果进行分析。结果:我们的团队采访了7位农业产业利益相关者。确定了三个主题:(1)竞争需求和监管疲劳;(2)工作场所态度和文化;(3)规则实施和评估建议。吸烟规则的主题和组成部分被用于开发调查。在128名受访者中,近一半(45.1%)的人认为自己的角色是所有者或种植者,39.3%的人认为自己是主管或经理。超过一半(51.6%)的受访者表示,他们的工作场所员工人数少于25人,17.2%的受访者表示员工人数在250人或以上。受访者来自西澳多个县,种植各种作物。他们监督的大多数雇主和工人报告了在工作中接触野火烟雾和相关的不良症状。几乎三分之一的受访者表示他们没有听说过吸烟规则(33.3%)。超过一半的答复者(53.9%)没有接受过管理有吸烟相关症状的工人的培训。约三分之一未接受过空气质量监测(40.0%)、暴露对健康的影响(36.8%)和实施保护性控制(31.0%)方面的培训。职业角色对规则成分的知识和培训差异不显著。结论:研究结果确定了农业工作场所在野火烟雾保护意识和培训方面的差距,特别是在症状识别和管理方面。确定了在工作场所实施保护性控制的障碍。调查结果将为针对农业的针对性外联和教育工具包提供信息,并支持制定和评价保护性职业健康规则。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Agricultural Employer Perspectives on Occupational Wildfire Smoke Rules.

Objectives: The purpose of the study was to examine the perspectives of agricultural employers and managers regarding wildfire smoke-related occupational health and safety protections. The aims were to (1) explore implementation and evaluation of the Washington (WA) State Department of Labor and Industries Wildfire Smoke Rule, (2) develop a survey to explore perspectives on the rule, and (3) examine the relationship between occupational roles and knowledge and training received related to components of the rule.

Methods: We used exploratory sequential mixed methods, including key informant interviews with industry stakeholders, survey design, and online survey administration to agricultural employers and managers. Thematic analysis of interviews informed survey design. Descriptive statistics and logistic regression were used to analyze survey results.

Results: Our team interviewed seven agricultural industry stakeholders. Three themes were identified: (1) competing demands and regulation fatigue, (2) workplace attitude and culture, and (3) suggestions for rule implementation and evaluation. Themes and components of the smoke rule were used to develop the survey. Of the 128 survey respondents, almost half (45.1%) reported owner or grower as their role and 39.3% reported supervisors or managers. Over half (51.6%) of respondents reported fewer than 25 employees in their workplace and 17.2% reported 250 or more employees. Respondents were from multiple WA counties and worked with various crops. Most employers and workers they supervise reported wildfire smoke exposure at work and related adverse symptoms. Almost one-third of respondents reported they had not heard of the smoke rule (33.3%). Over half of respondents have not received training on managing workers with smoke-related symptoms (53.9%). About one-third has not received training on air quality monitoring (40.0%), health effects of exposure (36.8%), and implementing protective controls (31.0%). Differences in knowledge and training on rule components by occupational role were insignificant.

Conclusion: Findings identify gaps in awareness and training regarding protection from wildfire smoke in the agricultural workplace, especially around symptom recognition and management. Barriers to implementing protective controls in the workplace were identified. Findings will inform targeted outreach and educational toolkits for the agricultural industry and support the development and evaluation of protective occupational health rules.

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