煤矿煤尘职业健康风险评估方法的应用比较  

Comparison between two methods for assessment of occupational health risk caused by coal dust

作　　者：张思雨[1] 汉锋[1] 叶萌[1] 陈永青[1] ZHANG Siyu;HAN Feng;YE Meng;CHEN Yongqing(National Institute of Occupational Health and Poison Control,Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention,Beijing 100050,China)

机构地区：[1]中国疾病预防控制中心职业卫生与中毒控制所,北京100050

出　　处：《职业卫生与应急救援》2020年第3期238-241,共4页Occupational Health and Emergency Rescue

基　　金：国家自然科学基金(81472956,30972449);职业健康风险评估与国家职业卫生标准制定项目(1311400010903)。

摘　　要：目的通过大样本比较国际采矿与金属委员会定量评估法和职业危害风险指数法在煤矿煤尘职业健康风险评估中的应用效果。方法选取11座煤矿6个生产系统的煤尘作业岗位作为评估对象,通过两种风险评估方法分别对196个岗位进行评估,分析两种方法评估结果的差异与相关性。结果两种方法的评估结果呈较好的正相关性(r=0.611,P<0.05),最高风险级别的作业岗位主要聚集在煤炭开采企业的采煤、掘进生产系统。两种方法评估结果相近岗位多为风险等级较低的岗位,在风险等级较高岗位的评估结果中存在较大分歧。结论国际采矿与金属委员会定量评估法可较好地反映工作环境中煤尘的暴露风险水平,职业危害风险指数法更能反映出劳动者在得到防护设施保护后实际接触的风险水平。Objective To explore the advantages and disadvantages of use of the quantitative evaluation method proposed by International Council on Mining and Metals(ICMM)or the occupational hazard risk index method in assessment of occupational health risk caused by coal dust in the coal mines.Methods A total of 196 worksites with coal dust,distributed in 6 production systems in 11 coal mines were studied.The difference and correlation between the two evaluation results were analyzed and the reason was explored.Results There was a highly positive correlation of the evaluation results between two methods(r=0.611,P<0.05).The worksites with highest risk were mainly distributed in the mining and tunneling systems.There was good consistency in the worksites with lower occupational health risk,while higher inconsistency was noted in the worksites with higher risk levels.Conclusion Quantitative evaluation method proposed by ICMM can better reflect the exposure risk level of coal dust in the working environment,and occupational hazard risk index method can better reflect the actual risk level of workers after they use protective facilities.

关 键 词：煤矿 煤尘 职业健康风险评估 ICMM法 职业危害风险指数法 

分 类 号：R135[医药卫生—劳动卫生]