多种职业健康风险评估方法在制鞋行业中的应用比较  

Application and comparison of multiple occupational health risk assessment methods in the footwear industry

作　　者：彭志恒[1] 何易楠 冯玉超[1] 张海[1] 邓颖聪[1] 周丽屏[1] 周海林[1] 王致[1] PENG Zhiheng;HE Yinan;FENG Yuchao;ZHANG Hai;DENG Yingcong;ZHOU Liping;ZHOU Hailin;WANG Zhi(Guangzhou Occupational Diseases Prevention and Treatment Hospital,Guangzhou,Guangdong 510620,China)

机构地区：[1]广州市职业病防治院,广东广州510620

出　　处：《职业卫生与应急救援》2023年第6期693-698,共6页Occupational Health and Emergency Rescue

基　　金：广州市科学技术局重点研发计划项目(202206010061);广州市医学重点学科建设项目(2021—2023年);广州市卫生健康科技项目(20221A010034);广州市卫生健康科技项目(20231A011058);广州市市校(院)联合资助专题(广州市职业环境与健康重点实验室)(2023A0350502)。

摘　　要：目的探索不同评估方法在制鞋行业中的适用性,为我国制鞋行业职业健康风险评估的方法研究提供科学依据。方法2019—2020年,选取广州市内4家制鞋企业作为研究对象,采用美国环境保护署吸入风险评估法(简称“美国EPA法”)、危险源辨识风险评价方法(简称“MES法”)、国际采矿和金属委员会职业健康评估法(简称“ICMM法”)、澳大利亚职业健康与安全风险评估法(简称“澳大利亚法”)、GBZ/T 298—2017《工作场所化学有害因素职业健康风险评估技术导则》综合指数法(简称“综合指数法”)和危害作业分级法等6种职业健康风险评估方法对制鞋企业的重点岗位进行职业健康风险评估,采用风险比值对6种方法的风险评估结果进行标化,比较6种评估方法评估结果。结果4家制鞋企业重点岗位的苯、1,2-二氯乙烷、三氯乙烯和正己烷检测结果均符合国家职业接触限值要求。6种职业健康风险评估方法之间存在差异,两两比较结果显示,美国EPA法、综合指数法、MES法、ICMM法和澳大利亚法风险等级均高于危害作业分级法,差异有统计学意义(P<0.05);其中美国EPA法评估的风险水平最高,其次是综合指数法,MES法和澳大利亚法评估的风险水平相近,ICMM法与其他评估方法差异较大。结论建议以综合指数法为主,MES法和澳大利亚法为辅,多种评估方法相结合对制鞋行业进行职业健康风险评估。Objective To explore the applicability of different assessment methods in the shoe-making industry,providing a scientific basis for the selection of occupational health risk assessment methods in the shoe-making industry in China.Methods From 2019 to 2020,four shoe-making enterprises in Guangzhou were selected as the study objects.And six methods,including the US Environmental Protection Agency inhalation risk assessment method(US EPA method),the Multiple Exposure Scenarios method(MES method),the International Council on Mining and Metals Occupational Health Assessment Method(ICMM method),the Australian Occupational Health and Safety Risk Assessment Method(Australian method),the GBZ/T 298—2017“Technical Guidelines for Occupational Health Risk Assessment of Chemical Hazardous Factors in the Workplace”Comprehensive Index Method(Comprehensive Index Method),and the Hazardous Operation Grading Method,were used to conduct occupational health risk assessment for the key positions in the shoe-making enterprises.The risk ratio was used to standardize the risk assessment results derived from these six methods,and the results of the six methods were compared.Results The airborne concentrations of benzene,1,2-dichloroethane,trichloroethylene,and n-Hexane in the key positions of these four shoe-making enterprises were lower than the national occupational exposure limit.There were differences in results derived from six methods.The pairwise comparison showed that the risk levels assessed by the US EPA method,the Comprehensive Index Method,the MES method,the ICMM method,and the Australian method were statistically higher than those assessed with the Hazardous Operation Grading Method(P<0.05).Among them,the risk level assessed by the US EPA method was the highest,followed by the Comprehensive Index Method;similar risk levels were derived by the MES method and the Australian method;and the ICMM method had a large difference from other assessment methods.Conclusions It is recommended to use the Comprehensive Index Method as

关 键 词：风险评估 制鞋行业 吸入风险评估 半定量风险评估 综合指数 风险比值 

分 类 号：R134[医药卫生—劳动卫生] R136[医药卫生—公共卫生与预防医学]