Safety and Health at Work

Occupational Safety and Health Research Institute, Korea Occupational Safety and Health Agency (산업안전보건연구원)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

The Evaluation of Personal Protective Equipment Usage Habit of Mining Employees Using Structural Equation Modeling

  • Kursunoglu, Nilufer (Batman University, Department of Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering) ;
  • Onder, Seyhan (Eskisehir Osmangazi University, Mining Engineering Department) ;
  • Onder, Mustafa (Eskisehir Osmangazi University, Mining Engineering Department)
  • Received : 2021.11.09
  • Accepted : 2022.03.09
  • Published : 2022.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background: In occupational studies, it is a known situation that technical and organizational attempts are used to prevent occupational accidents. Especially in the mining sector, if these attempts cannot prevent occupational accidents, personal protective equipment (PPE) becomes a necessity. Thus, in this study, the main objective is to examine the effects of the variables on the use of PPE and identify important factors. Methods: A questionnaire was implemented and structural equation modeling was conducted to ascertain the significant factors affecting the PPE use of mining employees. The model includes the factors that ergonomics, the efficiency of PPE and employee training, and PPE usage habit. Results: The results indicate that ergonomics and employee training have no significant effect (p > 0.05) on the use of PPE. The efficiency of PPE has a statistically meaningful effect (p < 0.05) on the use of PPE. Various variables have been evaluated in previous studies. However, none of them examined the variables simultaneously. Conclusion: The developed model in the study enables to better focus on ergonomics and employee training in the PPE usage. The effectiveness of a PPE makes its use unavoidable. Emphasizing PPE effectiveness in OHS training and even showing them in practice will increase employees' PPE usage. The fact that a PPE with high effectiveness is also ergonomic means that it will be used at high rates by the employee.

Keywords

References

  1. Onder S. Evaluation of occupational injuries with lost days among opencast coal mine workers through logistic regression models. Saf Sci 2013;59:86-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2013.05.002.
  2. Olson R, Grosshuesch A, Schmidt S, Gray M, Wipfli B. Observational learning and workplace safety: the effects of viewing the collective behavior of multiple social models on the use of personal protective equipment. J Saf Res 2009;40(5):383-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2009.07.004.
  3. Demirbilek T, Cakir O. Individual and organizational variables affecting the use of personal protective equipment [Internet]. [cited 2020 July 20]. Dokuz Eylul Univ Fac Econ Administrative Sci J 2008;23(2):173-91. Available from: https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/deuiibfd/issue/22740/242722.
  4. OSHA. Personal protective equipment [Internet]. OSHA 3151-12R. 2004 [cited 2021 June 26]. Available from: https://www.osha.gov/sites/default/files/publications/osha3151.pdf.
  5. Sutton I. Plant design and operations: personal protective equipment. Virginia (USA): Gulf Professional Publishing; 2017. 598 p.
  6. Sapbamrer R, Thammachai A. Factors affecting use of personal protective equipment and pesticide safety practices: a systematic review. Environ Res 2020;185:109444. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2020.109444.
  7. Tetzlaff EJ, Goggins KA, Pegoraro AL, Dorman SC, Pakalnis V, Eger TR. Safety culture: a retrospective analysis of occupational health and safety mining reports. Saf Health Work 2021;12(2):201-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shaw.2020.12.001.
  8. Lopez-Toro AA, Pardo-Ferreira MC, Martinez-Rojas M, Carrillo-Castrillo JA, Rubio-Romero JC. Analysis of occupational accidents during the chainsaws use in Andalucia. Saf Sci 2021;143:105436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2021.105436.
  9. Lombardi DA, Verma SK, Brennan MJ, Perry MJ. Factors influencing worker use of personal protective eyewear. Accid Anal Prev 2009;41(4):755-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2009.03.017.
  10. Sanmiquel L, Freijo M, Edo J, Rossell JM. Analysis of work related accidents in the Spanish mining sector from 1982-2006. J Saf Res 2010;41(1):1-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2009.09.008.
  11. Bansah KJ, Yalley AB, Dumakor-Dupey N. The hazardous nature of small scale underground mining in Ghana. J Sustainable Mining 2016;15(1):8-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsm.2016.04.004.
  12. Zhang J, Fu J, Hao H, Fu G, Nie F, Zhang W. Root causes of coal mine accidents: characteristics of safety culture deficiencies based on accident statistics. Process Saf Environ 2020;136:78-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2020.01.024.
  13. Ismail SN, Ramli A, Aziz HA. Research trends in mining accidents study: a systematic literature review. Saf Sci 2021;143:105438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2021.105438.
  14. Akbar-Khanzadeh F, Bisesi MS, Rivas RD. Comfort of personal protective equipment. Appl Ergon 1995;3(26):195-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/0003-6870(95)00017-7.
  15. Flynn MA, Keller B, DeLaney SC. Promotion of alternative-sized personal protective equipment. J Saf Res 2017;63:43-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2017.08.004.
  16. Li H, Liu Y, Peng K. Characterizing the relationship between road infrastructure and local economy using structural equation modeling. Transp Policy 2018;61:17-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2017.10.002.
  17. Ouyang X, Lee SY, Connolly RM. Structural equation modelling reveals factors regulating surface sediment organic carbon content and CO2 efflux in a subtropical mangrove. Sci Total Environ 2017;578:513-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.10.218.
  18. Renganathan R, Balachandran S, Govindarajan K. Customer perception towards banking sector: structural equation modeling approach. Afr J Bus Manage 2012;6(46):11426-36. https://doi.org/10.5897/AJBM12.445.
  19. Hesse K, Klingberg S. Examining the cognitive model of caregiving e a structural equation modelling approach. Psychiat Res 2014;217:171-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2014.02.023.
  20. Beaumelle L, Vile D, Lamy I, Vandenbulcke F, Gimbert F, Hedde M. A structural equation model of soil metal bioavailability to earthworms: confronting causal theory and observations using a laboratory exposure to field-contaminated soils. Sci Total Environ 2016;569-570:961-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.06.023.
  21. Yildiz E, Ulker Demirel E. Measuring the effects of brand authenticity dimensions on word-of-mouth marketing via brand image using structural equation modeling [Internet]. [cited 2020 May 12]. Int J Business Soc Sci 2017;8:121-30. Available from: https://www.ijbssnet.com/journals/Vol_8_No_3_March_2017/11.pdf.
  22. Zaira MM, Hadikusumo BHV. Structural equation model of integrated safety intervention practices affecting the safety behaviour of workers in the construction industry. Saf Sci 2017;98:124-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2017.06.007.
  23. Norris E, Myers L. Determinants of personal protective equipment (PPE) use in UK motorcyclists: exploratory research applying an extended theory of planned behavior. Accid Anal Prev 2013;60:219-30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2013.09.002.
  24. Wagner H, Kim AJ, Gordon L. Relationship between personal protective equipment, self-efficacy, and job satisfaction of women in the building trades. J Constr Eng M 2013;139(10):04013005. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000739.
  25. Indasah, Maula NZ, Dewi KP. Relationship of behaviour in the use of personal protective equipment (APD), eating a healthy and balanced, and personal hygiene to health status of skin on scavengers in Tpa kediri [Internet]. [cited 2020 May 12]. J Appl Environ Biol Sci 2016;6(2):1-5. Available from: https://www.textroad.com/pdf/JAEBS/J.%20Appl.%20Environ.%20Biol.%20Sci.,%206(2)1-5,%202016.pdf.
  26. Kearney GD, Xu X, Balanay JAG, Allen DL, Rafferty AP. Assessment of personal protective equipment use among farmers in eastern North Carolina: a cross-sectional study. J Agromedicine 2015;20(1):43-54. https://doi.org/10.1080/1059924X.2014.976730.
  27. Jagt KVD, Tielemans E, Links I, Brouwer D, van Hemmen J. Effectiveness of personal protective equipment: relevance of dermal and inhalation exposure to chlorpyrifos among pest control operators. J Occup Environ Hyg 2004;1:355-62. https://doi.org/10.1080/15459620490449710.
  28. Meydan CH, Sesen H. Structural equation modeling Amos applications. 2nd ed. Ankara (Turkey): Detay Publishing; 2015. 144 p.
  29. Occupational Safety and Health Branch Labour Department. Chemical safety in the workplace, Guidance notes on personal protective equipment (PPE) for use and handling of chemicals [Internet]; 2009 [cited 2021 May 15]. Available from: https://www.labour.gov.hk/eng/public/os/C/equipment.pdf.
  30. Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. Using multivariate statistics. 6th ed. USA: Pearson New International Edition; 2013. 1072 p.
  31. Gupta V, Kapur PK, Kumar D. Modeling and measuring attributes influencing DevOps implementation in an enterprise using structural equation modeling. Inform Software Tech 2017;92:75-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2017.07.010.
  32. Hair Jr JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, Anderson RE. Multivariate data analysis: a global perspective. 7th ed. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education; 2010.
  33. Comrey AL, Lee HB. A first course in factor analysis. 2nd ed. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.; 1992.
  34. Nunally JC, Bernstein IH. Psychometric theory. 3rd ed. New York (USA): McGraw-Hill.; 1994. 736 p.
  35. Segars A. Assessing the unidimensionality of measurement: a paradigm and illustration within the context of information systems research. Omega, Lnternational J Manage Sci 1997;25(1):107-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-0483(96)00051-5.
  36. Schmitt N. Uses and abuses of coefficient alpha. Psychol Assess 1996;8(4):350-3. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.8.4.350.
  37. Kline RB. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. 3rd ed. New York (USA): Guilford Publishing; 2010. 427 p.
  38. Mayer A, Korhonen E. Assessment of the protection efficiency and comfort of personal protective equipment in real conditions of use. Int J Occup Saf Ergo 1999;5(3):347-60. https://doi.org/10.1080/10803548.1999.11076425.
  39. Murphy WJ, Stephenson MR, Byrne DC, Witt B, Duran J. Effects of training on hearing protector attenuation. Noise Health 2011;13:132-41. https://doi.org/10.4103/1463-1741.77215.
  40. Fiend MA, Kohn JP. Fundamentals of occupational safety and health. 4th ed. USA: Scarecrow Press; 2007.
  41. MacFarlane E, Chapman A, Benke G, Meaklim J, Sim M, McNeil J. Training and other predictors of personal protective equipment use in Australian grain farmers using pesticides. Occup Environ Med 2008;65(2):141-6. https://doi.org/10.1136/oem.2007.034843.
  42. Kline P. An easy guide to factor analysis. Abingdon-on-Thames: Routledge; 1994.
  43. Zainudin A. A handbook on SEM: structural equation model- ling using amos graphics. 4th ed. Kelantan: University Technology MARA Press; 2012.
  44. Seo H, Lee Y, Kim J, Jee N. Analyzing safety behaviors of temporary construction workers using structural equation modeling. Saf Sci 2015;77:160-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2015.03.010.