Ameneh Fayazi, Mostafa Pouyakian, Mohammad Javad Jafari, Soheila Khodakarim,
Volume 9, Issue 1 (4-2019)
Abstract
Introduction: Changing the national System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals to Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labelling of Chemicals (GHS) is beneficial for all the industries of the countries, their workers and the general public. Increasing the awareness of chemical hazards, improving the safety uses, reducing chemical accidents, and providing better conditions for emergency response in the event of chemical accidents, are some of the most important benefits of the GHS. Present study aimed to develop a tool for assessing the awareness level of chemical related personnel using the GHS and current status.
Material and Methods: By reviewing the literatures, the GHS Guide, available sources and consultation with experts, two questionnaires were developed to assess the level of awareness of chemical related personnel and current statue. The two designed questionnaires included personal information, multiple choice questions and questions related to safety signs. The face and content validity was conducted using the experts’ panel assessment. The face validity, content validity ratio (CVR) and content validity index (CVI) were all calculated for each question.
Results: Content Validity Ratios (CVR) and Content Validity Index (CVI) were calculated for each question. The general clarity, general fit and general simplicity of the awareness questionnaire (questionnaire number 1) were obtained 0.87, 0.91 and 0.77, respectively. The mean content validity index and the mean content validity ratio were obtained 0.85, 0.85, respectively. The overall clarity, overall fit, and the general simplicity of the current status questionnaire (questionnaire number 2) was 0.92, 0.89 and 0.93, respectively. The mean content validity index and mean content validity ratio were obtained 0.92 and 0.81, respectively.
Conclusion: The two questionnaires used to assess the awareness level of chemical related personnel and current statue of GHS, were identified as valid instruments and therefore is recommended as a valid tool for future studies.
Soqrat Omari Shekaftik, Jamal Biganeh, Maedeh Hosseinzadeh, Hamidreza Jafari Nodoushan, Neda Mehrparvar,
Volume 14, Issue 4 (12-2024)
Abstract
Introduction: Workplaces often contain potential risks, such as exposure to toxic chemicals. Conducting a thorough health risk assessment helps employers recognize these dangers and implement necessary controls. In the 20th century, modern risk assessment frameworks began to be established with the rise of public health agencies.
Material and Methods: The present study is a narrative review. In order to obtain necessary information, Persian and English texts were searched in Web of Science, PubMed, Scopus, SID and Magiran databases. Keywords such as “health risk assessment”, “chemicals” and “nanomaterials” were used in this study.
Results: Both quantitative and qualitative health risk assessments play critical roles in occupational health, with each method providing different levels of depth and accuracy depending on the situation. EPA Model, Monte-Carlo Simulation, Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic (PBPK) Modeling, Quantitative Structure-Activity Relationship (QSAR) Models, Probabilistic Risk Assessment (PRA), Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA), and Biologically Based Dose-Response (BBDR) Models, are among the most important quantitative methods for assessing the health risk of chemicals. COSHH Model, ICCT Model, ICMM Model, Australian Model, and Romanian Model, are the most important qualitative methods for health risk assessment of chemicals. In addition to the quantitative and qualitative methods, semi-quantitative methods like Singapore Model, LEC Method, and SEP Model, have also been proposed for assessing the health risk of chemicals. The preference for qualitative over quantitative methods in the risk assessment of activities involving nanomaterials stems from substantial uncertainties, limited data availability, and the unique and complex behaviors of nanomaterials in the workplaces.
Conclusion: Overall, the evolution of health risk assessment methods reflects a continuous drive towards greater accuracy, reliability, and relevance. As we continue to innovate and expand our knowledge, the field is well-positioned to address the complex and evolving landscape of chemical and material risks, ensuring the protection of human health and the environment.
