| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ann. occup. Hyg., Vol. 46, No. 1, pp. 3-4, 2002
© 2002 British Occupational Hygiene Society
Published by Oxford University Press
Seeing is Believing
Programme for Research on Development Processes, National Institute for Working Life, SE-112 79 Stockholm, Sweden
Received 7 August 2001; in final form 28 September 2001.
One of the themes for discussion at the IOHA Bergen Conference in June will be the use of ‘exposure visualization’ in occupational hygiene. Recent applications of research in the last 15 years may well result in this approach becoming a major method of exposure control in the workplace.
The identification and measurement of hazardous exposures have always been, and must continue to be, a primary objective, but of equal importance is the discovery of effective methods of control by which risks can be minimized or eliminated. Most hygienists are all too aware of the large gap between what research has shown is possible and what is achieved, especially in a small enterprise. It is not that the employers are unwilling to implement the available control measures, but rather that they have little idea of how best to move from knowledge to practice.
In the early 1980s, a research group at the National Institute for Working Life in Sweden (at that time part of the National Board of Occupational Safety and Health) met to consider ways in which environmental measurements themselves could be used to engage exposed workers in the control process. What was needed were methods for them to see with their own eyes and in real time the levels of potential hazard to which they were being exposed. At that time, computer and video technology had developed to the point where their use in occupational hygiene was becoming a realistic possibility. Visualization methods exploited advances in real-time monitoring instruments, video technology and computer use. From these, the Swedish research group identified two methodologies, later named GridMap and PIMEX. The former entailed the visualization of contaminant dispersion around the source (Rosén and Andersson, 1989) and the latter, worker exposure to air contaminants (Rosén and Lundström, 1987). There was considerable interest when these methods were published, and some research groups put much effort into the technical development of the methods, as the PIMEX equipment, marketed by a Swedish company, was regarded as too expensive.
The late 1980s and early 1990s saw extensive technical development, but less progress on strategy of use. Against this background, four research groups from Sweden, Finland and Austria collaborated in a project using visualization to improve workplace conditions, resulting in an approach called WISP (Workplace Improvement Strategy by PIMEX) (Rosén, 1999). As part of the WISP project, case studies were made in nine workshops in these three countries. In one company, where the problem was welding fumes, measurements had shown unacceptable exposure, despite the fact that the company had invested in an effective local exhaust system. After a few minutes’ work with PIMEX, the welders saw how the exposure occurred; it proved easy for them to change their work practice, mainly by using exhaust ventilation more effectively, with markedly reduced exposure. Similarly, it was possible for the staff in a factory producing pleasure boats to reduce exposure to styrene dramatically, and within 1 h. In such workplaces, where the worker him/herself controls the source, it is often possible to reduce exposure by 90% almost immediately, simply by using the existing equipment more effectively. In another company, however, where better use of existing ventilation was insufficient, the PIMEX record was decisive in helping the company’s occupational hygienist to obtain investment in new equipment.
These results are encouraging, and illustrate the importance of these methods. Visualization of contaminants and noise has led to an increased interest among those involved to seek possible solutions and to test them. Because visualization presented easily understandable information, this stimulated an active interest in testing control measures. In many cases it proved possible to reduce exposure drastically by simple changes. Visualization thus acted as a catalyst for productive communication between process experts and occupational hygienists, and became the key to a systematic problem-solving process.
Another use of visualization for implementing control is through training videos. The Swedish group has used this method to enable occupational hygienists to transfer knowledge on airborne contamination and control, in collaboration with occupational health services, trade organizations and labour inspectorates, etc. Of special interest is a collaborative project with the World Health Organization (WHO), for which some videos have already been produced (Andersson and Rosén, 1993, 1997, 1998); this work is continuing, with the intention of producing material linked to the WHO dust control document (WHO, 1998). Such videos have been highly appreciated because visualization makes it much easier for all concerned to understand reasons for exposure and how it can be controlled. A recent example was its use in Estonia, where 5000 students at Tallinn Technical University were presented last year with a video on the work environment in the woodworking industry.
From the first experiments with GridMap and PIMEX their educational potential was obvious, and they were expected to play an important role in exposure control. This has yet to happen, but the technology is now developed, the equipment is on the market and WISP has demonstrated a strategy to eliminate hazardous workplace exposures.
Although these visualization methods are well established, there is a continuing need for research and development to sharpen these ‘tools’ and to evaluate their educational effectiveness. Such studies are best conducted by multidisciplinary research groups. Behavioural and educational expertise are needed because the acceptance of risk and communication of knowledge are essential. Competence in sociology and economics is of equal importance to the occupational hygienist’s expertise in risk assessment and control. Work in such groups can be frustrating, depending as it does on conflicting scientific traditions and language, but it pays off in the long term. Without it, we will continue to build a stack of knowledge about risks and control, but without bringing that knowledge to the workers who can use it.
Prophecies about speed of development and future use of PIMEX, presented 15 years ago, were perhaps a little optimistic. Hopefully the Bergen conference in June will lead to a substantial acceleration in visualization methods and strategies for their use.
REFERENCES
Andersson I, Rosén G. (1993) Simple pollution control measures at work. Video. Swedish National Institute for Working Life.
Andersson I, Rosén G. (1997) Control of occupational exposure to air contaminants. Technology, source and transmission path. Video. Swedish National Institute for Working Life.
Andersson I, Rosén G. (1998) Control of exposure to air contaminants. Work practice and ventilation. Video. Swedish National Institute for Working Life.
Rosén G. (1999) WISP. Workplace improvement strategy by PIMEX. Final report to the European Commission; SAFE project no. 97 202356 05F05.
Rosén G, Andersson I-M. (1989) GridMap: an aid in elimination of air contaminants in workplaces. Appl Ind Hyg; 2(4): 32–8.
Rosén G, Lundström S. (1987) Concurrent video filming and measuring for visualization of exposure. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J; 48: 688–92.
WHO. (1999) Hazard prevention and control in the work environment: airborne dust. Geneva: World Health Organization. Available from: http://www.who.int/peh/Occupational_health/ Dust/dusttoc.htm
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  G. ROSEN, I-M. ANDERSSON, P. T. WALSH, R. D. R. CLARK, A. SAAMANEN, K. HEINONEN, H. RIIPINEN, and R. PAAKKONEN A Review of Video Exposure Monitoring as an Occupational Hygiene Tool Ann. Hyg., April 1, 2005; 49(3): 201 - 217. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. D. McGLOTHLIN Occupational Exposure Visualization Comes of Age Ann. Hyg., April 1, 2005; 49(3): 197 - 199. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||