2种风险评估方法在某研究所综合实验大楼建设项目职业病危害评价中的应用  

Application of two risk assessment methods on occupational hazard evaluation of comprehensive experimental building construction project of a research institute

作　　者：王静 宋惠平[1,2] 高茂龙[1,2] WANG Jing;SONG Hui-ping;GAO Mao-long(Office,,Beijing Geriatric Hospital,Beijing,100095,China;Institute of Geriatric Clinical and Rehabilitation,Beijing Geriatric Hospital,Beijing,100095,China)

机构地区：[1]北京老年医院院办公室,北京100095 [2]北京老年医院老年病临床与康复研究所,北京100095

出　　处：《职业与健康》2020年第21期2891-2894,2898,共5页Occupation and Health

基　　金：北京市医院管理局“青苗”计划(QML20182101)。

摘　　要：目的用不同的风险评估方法对云南省某研究所实验室进行职业健康风险评估,探讨各风险评估方法的适用性。方法2019年12月选择云南省某研究所实验室进行调查检测,应用GBZ/T 298—2017《工作场所化学毒物有害因素职业健康风险评估技术导则》中的半定量评估中的综合指数法及新加坡化学物质职业暴露半定量风险评估模型(新加坡模型)进行职业健康风险评估,结合职业卫生现场调查情况对各风险评估方法结果进行比较分析。结果经检测,某研究所实验室存在的化学有害因素均低于职业接触限值的要求,除硫酸、氧化汞在综合指数法中判定为低风险,在新加坡模型中判定为中等风险,其他化学物质的风险分级一致。2种风险评估方法一致性检验结果为:综合指数法和新加坡模型的风险等级的一致率为88.32%,Kappa值为0.61,一致性程度较强(Z=2.71,P<0.01)。结论综合指数法和新加坡模型均适用于某研究所综合实验大楼职业病危害因素风险评估,综合指数法较新加坡模型缺少了操作人数的影响,导致部分化学有害因素风险等级低于新加坡模型。Objective To conduct the occupational hazard evaluation on laboratory of a research institute in Yunnan Province by using different risk assessment methods,explore the the applicability of various risk assessment methods.Methods In December 2019,laboratory of a research institute in Yunnan Province was selected for investigation and testing.The composite index method of semi-quantitative assessment in the GBZ/T 298-2017 Guidelines for occupational health risk assessment of chemicals in the workplace,and the semi-quantitative risk assessment model of chemical occupational exposure in Singapore(Singapore model)were used to assess the occupational health risk,and the results of each risk assessment method were compared in combination with the occupational health field survey.Results The chemical hazards in the laboratory of a research institute were found to be below the occupational exposure limits.The sulphuric acid and mercuric oxide were determined to be low risk in the composite index method and medium risk in the Singapore model.The risk levels of other chemicals were same.The results of consistency test of the two risk assessment methods were as follows:the consistency rate of the risk grade of the composite index method and the Singapore model was 88.32%,the Kappa value was 0.61,the difference in consistency was statistically significant(Z=2.71,P<0.01),and the consistency degree was stronger.Conclusion Both the composite index method and the Singapore model are suitable for the risk assessment of occupational hazards in the comprehensive experimental building of a research institute.The composite index method lacks the influence of the number of operators compared with the Singapore model,resulting in the lower risk level of some chemical hazards than Singapore model.

关 键 词：风险评估 化学有害因素 综合指数法 新加坡化学物质职业暴露半定量风险评估模型 职业健康 

分 类 号：R134.2[医药卫生—劳动卫生]