Ghittori S, Ferrari M, Negri S, Serranti P, Sacco P, Biffi R, Imbriani M
Laboratorio per la Gestione e l'Analisi dei Rischi Occupazionali (L - GAROC), Fondazione "Salvatore Maugeri" - ISPESL, Pavia, Italy.
G Ital Med Lav Ergon. 2006 Jan-Mar;28(1):30-43.
Employers are responsible for the prevention of risks and must provide for the safety and health of their workers. They are obliged to apply the general principles of prevention: to avoid, where possible, any risk; to characterize and hence to estimate residual risks; to eliminate risks at the source; to adjust jobs to the needs of workers and not workers to the jobs. When we pass to the practical performance of these shared principles we introduce many problems: problems concerning terminology; problems in estimating the nature of the risks that are faced; coordination problems between the subjects that preside over prevention; problems arising from the different typology of the companies investigated In order to answer these questions the "Industrial Hygienists" have long since created various strategies for the prevention and control of risks. Among different models the methods Control Banding and Sobane-Deparis are undoubtedly the most promising. Control Banding is designed to assist especially Small and Medium Enterprises in complying with the chemical safety regulations, the scheme uses the R phrases that in Europe must be assigned to potentially harmful chemicals by the manufacturer of the chemical. R phrases describe the most important harmful effects of a chemical and have been adopted in many non European countries also. The combination of the hazard classification of the chemical and assessment of the exposure potential will allow understanding of the level of risk thus leading the person carrying out the assessment to an appropriate control method. Occupational hygienists with experience of assessing occupational exposure to chemicals agreed parameters that could be used to give reasonable indications of exposure potential. One of them is quantity being used and three categories--small, medium and large--are defined. The likelihood of the chemical becoming airborne has been addressed by defining solids according to levels of dustiness and liquids according to volatility. A simple graph that uses the boiling point of the chemical and the process operating temperature assigns the chemical a high, medium or low volatility rating. The user now has enough information to identify the control approach required to adequately reduce exposures to the chemical Occupational hygienists agreed on three broad control approaches: General Ventilation; Engineering Control; Containment. However it is recognised that in some cases specialist advice will be needed. The user takes the hazard group, quantity and level of dustiness/volatility and matches them to a control approach using a simple table. The controls are described in control guidance sheets, which comprise both general information and, for commonly performed tasks, more specific advice. The second section of the document describes a risk-prevention strategy, called SOBANE, in four levels. These four levels are: screening, where the risk factors are detected by the workers and their management, and obvious solutions are implemented; observation, where the remaining problems are studied in more detail, one by one, and the reasons and the solutions are discussed in detail; analysis, where, when necessary, an occupational health (OH) practitioner is called upon to carry out appropriate measurements to develop specific solutions; expertise, where, in very sophisticated and rare cases, the assistance of an expert is called upon to solve a particular problem. The method for the participatory screening of the risks, Deparis, is proposed for the first level screening of the SOBANE strategy. The aim of Sobane strategy is to make risk prevention faster, more cost effective, and more effective in coordinating the contributions of the workers themselves, their management, the internal and external OH practitioners and the experts.
雇主有责任预防风险,必须为其工人提供安全与健康保障。他们有义务应用预防的一般原则:尽可能避免任何风险;识别并进而评估残余风险;从源头消除风险;根据工人需求调整工作,而非让工人适应工作。当我们着手落实这些共同原则时,会引出诸多问题:有关术语的问题;评估所面临风险性质的问题;负责预防的各方之间的协调问题;因所调查公司的不同类型而产生的问题。为回答这些问题,“工业卫生学家”早就制定了各种风险预防与控制策略。在不同模式中,控制分级法和索班 - 德帕里斯法无疑是最具前景的。控制分级法旨在特别协助中小企业遵守化学品安全法规,该方案使用R短语,在欧洲,化学品制造商必须为潜在有害化学品指定这些短语。R短语描述了化学品最重要的有害影响,许多非欧洲国家也采用了这些短语。化学品的危害分类与接触可能性评估相结合,将有助于了解风险水平,从而使进行评估的人员找到合适的控制方法。有评估化学品职业接触经验的职业卫生学家商定了可用于合理指示接触可能性的参数。其中之一是使用量,并定义了小、中、大三类。通过根据粉尘程度定义固体以及根据挥发性定义液体,解决了化学品变为空气传播的可能性问题。一个使用化学品沸点和工艺操作温度的简单图表为化学品赋予高、中或低挥发性等级。用户现在有足够的信息来确定充分降低化学品接触所需的控制方法。职业卫生学家商定了三种广泛的控制方法:全面通风;工程控制;密闭。然而,人们认识到在某些情况下需要专业建议。用户根据危害类别、使用量和粉尘/挥发性水平,通过一个简单表格将它们与一种控制方法进行匹配。控制方法在控制指导手册中进行了描述,手册既包含一般信息,对于常见任务还包含更具体的建议。该文件的第二部分描述了一种分为四个级别的风险预防策略,称为索班法。这四个级别是:筛查,由工人及其管理层检测风险因素,并实施明显的解决方案;观察,对剩余问题逐一进行更详细的研究,并详细讨论原因和解决方案;分析,必要时请职业健康从业者进行适当测量以制定具体解决方案;专家评估,在非常复杂和罕见的情况下,请专家协助解决特定问题。索班法策略的第一级筛查采用了德帕里斯参与式风险筛查方法。索班法策略的目的是使风险预防更快、更具成本效益,并且在协调工人自身、其管理层、内部和外部职业健康从业者以及专家的贡献方面更有效。