Journal of Health and Safety at Work

Introduction: Work conditions in kerbside ticket booths intensify the risk of health threats. In this research, it is aimed to introduce solutions for improving ergonomics conditions of these booths, by ranking and analysis the risk factors.

.

Material and Method: Demographic information as well as physical, mental, and safety conditions of 47 booths are collected through questionnaires, interview and video recording. Following, critical index was identified using a hybrid method including QEC checklist, ANOVA statistical test and innovative methods for determining ergonomic indices. Improvement strategiesfor the critical index were analysed,using CATIA V5 R20 software and RULA technique, and solutions were presented.

.

Result: Based on F-test at the 0.05 significance level, anthropometric characteristics and personal informationshowed no difference betweenmale and female vendors, except for weight. Comparison of ergonomic indices manifested the maximum occupational exposurefor physical-motor factors (45.39) and environmental factors (41.28). Additionally, the highest risks determined by Nordic questionnaire and QEC checklists belonged to arms and shoulders (38) and wrist (26). Three dimensional model of vender with current and suggested postures were analysed using RULA and accordingly it was found that risk levels were improved for right and left side of the vendor body from 7 and 5 to 3 and 1, and for customers from 6 to 1.

.

Conclusion: Vendors of electronic ticket booths are exposed to musculoskeletal and environmental health threats, in Mashhad. Relocating the booths, adjustingcounterand desk height can significantly reduce the risk of mentioned hazards

Introduction: Safety climate is the perception of personnel about the priority of safety in an organization. The objective of this study was to evaluate safety climate using Nordic questionnaire in a hospital.

Material and Method: In this cross-sectional study, 92 nurses working in different wards of a hospital in uromia city, Iran, filled out the NOSACQ-50 questionnaire. The responses of nurses were recorded with a 4-point Likert scale. The results were analyzed using descriptive and analytical statistics.

Results: Seventy-two percent of nurses were female and the remainders (28%) were men. The mean score of safety climate dimensions was different. “Management safety priority, commitment, and competence” and “Safety communication, learning, and trust in co-workers safety competence” dimensions obtained the lowest and the highest scores by nurses, respectively. The mean score of safety climate ranged 2.49 to 2.67 in different wards of the hospital. What is more, the mean safety climate was not statistically differed among nurses of various age and work experience categories (P-value> 0.05).

Conclusion: According to the results, it can be noted that the level of safety climate in the hospital was fairly good from the nurses’ viewpoint. However, attempts should be made to improve it, especially in the safety management related dimensions. Corrective control measures should be implemented in all wards of the hospital for all personnel with any age and work experience.