Wang Xin, Kang Ning, Liu Kai, Ning Kang, Dong Yiwen, Ye Meng
National Institute of Occupational Health and Poison Control, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Beijing 100050, China.
National Center for Occupational Safety and Health, Beijing 102308, China.
Wei Sheng Yan Jiu. 2025 Mar;54(2):301-309. doi: 10.19813/j.cnki.weishengyanjiu.2025.02.019.
To compare the application of four risk assessment methods in the noise-induced hearing loss risk assessment of metal mining enterprises.
Using typical sampling method, 27 metal mining enterprises were selected in Guangdong, Shandong and Liaoning Provinces. Enterprises basic information and noise exposure data of key positions were collected by using on-site hygiene investigation and noise detecting method. Occupational hazard risk index method, classification of occupational exposure to noise, guidelines for risk management of occupational noise hazard, the International Council on Mining and Mentals'(ICMM) risk rating table method were used to analyze the risk of noise-induced hearing loss in metal mining enterprises.
The median individual noise exposure of metal mining positions was 83.0dB(A), and 36.5%(70/192) of the measured values exceeded 85 dB(A). The noise exposure levels of excavation workers(93.5 dB(A)), mill operators(90.4 dB(A)) and crusher operators(86.2 dB(A)) were higher relatively. Different mining method(underground and surface) had significant effects on noise exposure of workers(P<0.05), and the noise exceeding standard rate of underground mining was higher(42.4%). According to the result of four risk assessment method, The overall occupational health risk level of noise-induced hearing loss was medium(weighted score 1.98) by ICMM risk rating table method, while the overall occupational health risk level of noise-induced hearing loss was low by occupational hazard risk index method, classification of occupational exposure to noise and guidelines for risk management of occupational noise hazard(weighted score 1.98, 1.73 and 1.86, respectively). The risk of excavation workers and mill operators were the highest, the risk of crusher operators was high, and the risk of air compressor operators, Screening operators, control workers, maintenance workers and pump operators were low or very low. The consistency of four risk assessment method was moderate(W=0.300, P<0.001), The classification of occupational exposure to noise and the guidelines for risk management of occupational noise hazard showed that these two risk assessment method had strong consistencies(Kappa=0.789, P<0.001).
The overall occupational health risk level of noise-induced hearing loss in metal mining enterprises in three provinces was low, and the highest risk positions were excavation workers and mill operators in 2019-2021. The classification of occupational exposure to noise and the guidelines for risk management of occupational noise hazard might overestimate the noise hazard risk when workers were equipped personal protection well. ICMM risk rating table method can distinguish the risk levels of different positions effectively and identify the high-risk hearing loss position as early warning. Occupational hazard risk index method was comprehensive and practical.
比较四种风险评估方法在金属矿山企业噪声性听力损失风险评估中的应用。
采用典型抽样方法，在广东、山东和辽宁三省选取27家金属矿山企业。通过现场卫生学调查和噪声检测方法收集企业基本信息及关键岗位噪声暴露数据。运用职业危害风险指数法、噪声职业接触分级、职业性噪声危害风险管理指南、国际采矿与金属理事会（ICMM）风险评级表法对金属矿山企业噪声性听力损失风险进行分析。
金属矿山岗位个体噪声暴露中位数为83.0dB(A)，36.5%（70/192）的测量值超过85dB(A)。采掘工（93.5dB(A)）、磨矿工（90.4dB(A)）和破碎工（86.2dB(A)）的噪声暴露水平相对较高。不同采矿方式（地下和露天）对工人噪声暴露有显著影响（P<0.05），地下采矿噪声超标率较高（42.4%）。根据四种风险评估方法结果，ICMM风险评级表法得出噪声性听力损失的总体职业健康风险水平为中等（加权得分1.98），而职业危害风险指数法、噪声职业接触分级和职业性噪声危害风险管理指南得出噪声性听力损失的总体职业健康风险水平为低（加权得分分别为1.98、1.73和1.86）。采掘工和磨矿工的风险最高，破碎工的风险为高，空压机操作工、筛选工、中控工、维修工人和水泵操作工的风险为低或极低。四种风险评估方法的一致性为中等（W=0.300，P<0.001），噪声职业接触分级和职业性噪声危害风险管理指南这两种风险评估方法显示出较强的一致性（Kappa=0.789，P<0.001）。
三省金属矿山企业噪声性听力损失的总体职业健康风险水平较低，2019—2021年风险最高的岗位是采掘工和磨矿工。当工人佩戴个人防护用品良好时，噪声职业接触分级和职业性噪声危害风险管理指南可能高估了噪声危害风险。ICMM风险评级表法能有效区分不同岗位的风险水平，识别高风险听力损失岗位进行预警。职业危害风险指数法综合实用。
