某炼钢厂实际工作环境中定量拟合因子与工作防护因子的相关性研究。

Ziqing Zhuang, Christopher C Coffey, Paul A Jensen, Donald L Campbell, Robert B Lawrence, Warren R Myers
{"title":"某炼钢厂实际工作环境中定量拟合因子与工作防护因子的相关性研究。","authors":"Ziqing Zhuang,&nbsp;Christopher C Coffey,&nbsp;Paul A Jensen,&nbsp;Donald L Campbell,&nbsp;Robert B Lawrence,&nbsp;Warren R Myers","doi":"10.1202/475.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Past studies have found little or no correlation between workplace protection factors (WPFs) and quantitative fit factors (FFs). This study investigated the effect of good- and poor-fitting half-facepiece, air-purifying respirators on protection in actual workplace environments at a steel foundry and the correlation between WPFs and FFs. Fifteen burners and welders, who wore respirators voluntarily, and chippers participated in this study. Each subject was fit-tested with two respirator models each with three sizes, for a total of six fit-tests. Models and sizes were assigned this way to provide a wide range of FFs among study participants. Each worker donned the respirator twice per day (at the beginning of the shift and following the lunch break) for 2 days. Quantitative FFs were first obtained for each donning using the PortaCount Plus trade mark in a separate room. Without redonning the respirators, workers performed normal work for 1 to 2 hours, and WPFs were measured by collecting ambient and in-facepiece samples simultaneously. A second fit-test was conducted without disturbing the respirator. FFs were obtained by averaging the results from the first and second fit-tests. The resulting FFs had a geometric mean (GM) of 400 (range=10-6010) and a geometric standard deviation (GSD) of 6.1. Of the 55 valid donnings, 43 were good fitting (FFs> or =100) and 12 were poor fitting (FFs<100). The WPFs had a GM of 920 (range=13-230,000) and a GSD of 17.8. The WPFs were found to be significantly correlated with the FFs (R(2)=.55 and p-value=.0001). Therefore, FF was shown to be a meaningful indicator of respirator performance in actual workplace environments.</p>","PeriodicalId":83618,"journal":{"name":"AIHA journal : a journal for the science of occupational and environmental health and safety","volume":"64 6","pages":"730-8"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2003-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Correlation between quantitative fit factors and workplace protection factors measured in actual workplace environments at a steel foundry.\",\"authors\":\"Ziqing Zhuang,&nbsp;Christopher C Coffey,&nbsp;Paul A Jensen,&nbsp;Donald L Campbell,&nbsp;Robert B Lawrence,&nbsp;Warren R Myers\",\"doi\":\"10.1202/475.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Past studies have found little or no correlation between workplace protection factors (WPFs) and quantitative fit factors (FFs). This study investigated the effect of good- and poor-fitting half-facepiece, air-purifying respirators on protection in actual workplace environments at a steel foundry and the correlation between WPFs and FFs. Fifteen burners and welders, who wore respirators voluntarily, and chippers participated in this study. Each subject was fit-tested with two respirator models each with three sizes, for a total of six fit-tests. Models and sizes were assigned this way to provide a wide range of FFs among study participants. Each worker donned the respirator twice per day (at the beginning of the shift and following the lunch break) for 2 days. Quantitative FFs were first obtained for each donning using the PortaCount Plus trade mark in a separate room. Without redonning the respirators, workers performed normal work for 1 to 2 hours, and WPFs were measured by collecting ambient and in-facepiece samples simultaneously. A second fit-test was conducted without disturbing the respirator. FFs were obtained by averaging the results from the first and second fit-tests. The resulting FFs had a geometric mean (GM) of 400 (range=10-6010) and a geometric standard deviation (GSD) of 6.1. Of the 55 valid donnings, 43 were good fitting (FFs> or =100) and 12 were poor fitting (FFs<100). The WPFs had a GM of 920 (range=13-230,000) and a GSD of 17.8. The WPFs were found to be significantly correlated with the FFs (R(2)=.55 and p-value=.0001). Therefore, FF was shown to be a meaningful indicator of respirator performance in actual workplace environments.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":83618,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"AIHA journal : a journal for the science of occupational and environmental health and safety\",\"volume\":\"64 6\",\"pages\":\"730-8\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2003-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"AIHA journal : a journal for the science of occupational and environmental health and safety\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1202/475.1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AIHA journal : a journal for the science of occupational and environmental health and safety","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1202/475.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

过去的研究发现,工作场所保护因素(WPFs)和定量契合因素(FFs)之间几乎没有相关性。本研究调查了某炼钢厂实际工作环境中,适合和不适合的半面罩、空气净化呼吸器对防护效果的影响,以及wpf和FFs之间的相关性。15名自愿佩戴呼吸器的焊工和焊工参与了这项研究。每位受试者使用两种型号的呼吸器进行适配测试,每种型号有三种尺寸,总共进行了六次适配测试。模型和大小是通过这种方式分配的,以便在研究参与者中提供广泛的FFs。每个工人每天戴两次防毒面具(在轮班开始时和午餐休息后),持续两天。首先在一个单独的房间里使用portaccount Plus商标获得每次穿戴的定量FFs。在不重新戴上呼吸器的情况下,工作人员进行1至2小时的正常工作,并通过同时收集环境和面部样本来测量wpf。在没有干扰呼吸器的情况下进行了第二次体能测试。对第一次和第二次拟合检验的结果取平均值,得到FFs。所得FFs的几何平均值(GM)为400(范围为10 ~ 6010),几何标准差(GSD)为6.1。在55个有效模型中,43个为良好拟合(ff >或=100),12个为不良拟合(ff)
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Correlation between quantitative fit factors and workplace protection factors measured in actual workplace environments at a steel foundry.

Past studies have found little or no correlation between workplace protection factors (WPFs) and quantitative fit factors (FFs). This study investigated the effect of good- and poor-fitting half-facepiece, air-purifying respirators on protection in actual workplace environments at a steel foundry and the correlation between WPFs and FFs. Fifteen burners and welders, who wore respirators voluntarily, and chippers participated in this study. Each subject was fit-tested with two respirator models each with three sizes, for a total of six fit-tests. Models and sizes were assigned this way to provide a wide range of FFs among study participants. Each worker donned the respirator twice per day (at the beginning of the shift and following the lunch break) for 2 days. Quantitative FFs were first obtained for each donning using the PortaCount Plus trade mark in a separate room. Without redonning the respirators, workers performed normal work for 1 to 2 hours, and WPFs were measured by collecting ambient and in-facepiece samples simultaneously. A second fit-test was conducted without disturbing the respirator. FFs were obtained by averaging the results from the first and second fit-tests. The resulting FFs had a geometric mean (GM) of 400 (range=10-6010) and a geometric standard deviation (GSD) of 6.1. Of the 55 valid donnings, 43 were good fitting (FFs> or =100) and 12 were poor fitting (FFs<100). The WPFs had a GM of 920 (range=13-230,000) and a GSD of 17.8. The WPFs were found to be significantly correlated with the FFs (R(2)=.55 and p-value=.0001). Therefore, FF was shown to be a meaningful indicator of respirator performance in actual workplace environments.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信