World at work: Refuse collectors

Kuijer, Paul; Frings‐Dresen, Monique H. W.

doi:10.1136/oem.2002.001172

Cited by 58 publications

(52 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…2,9 These high exposure levels were observed irrespective of the waste type handled, which agrees with the results reviewed by Kuijer and Frings-Dresen. 10 The endotoxin results were also greater than those reported in Sweden (compostable waste, 0.5 ng/m 3 ϭ 5 EU/m 3 ; unsorted waste, 0.7 ng/m 3 ϭ 7 EU/m 3 ), 11 but they were below the concentration range 12 of 4800 -9900 EU/m 3 that can cause acute pulmonary effects. 13 The average levels observed (bacteria Յ3 ϫ 10 5 CFU/m 3 , GNB ϭ 4 ϫ 10 4 CFU/ m 3 , fungi ϭ 10 5 CFU/m 3 ) were also greater than those measured for workers sorting household garbage.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 76%

An Assessment of Dust, Endotoxin, and Microorganism Exposure during Waste Collection and Sorting

Park

Ryu

Kim³

et al. 2011

Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study was conducted to assess inhalation exposure to dust, endotoxin, and microorganisms (including viable bacteria, Gram-negative bacteria [GNB], and fungi) during waste collection and sorting; to identify factors affecting this exposure; and to estimate the gastrointestinal exposure to microorganisms. A total of 48 or 49 workers involved in collecting and sorting waste from households or the street were studied. Each worker carried two personal samplers in which filters were placed in the breathing zone for estimation of inhalation exposure. To assess the possibility of gastrointestinal exposure, microorganisms on the workers' faces were collected before and after work and compared with those collected from office workers. Inhalation exposure levels were categorized according to job title, waste type handled, and working conditions and were compared using analysis of variance. Multiple regression models were developed to identify those factors that substantially affected inhalation exposure. The average exposure level to total dust was 0.9 mg/m 3 (range ϭ 0.05 to 4.51 mg/m 3 ), and the average exposure to endotoxin was 1123 EU/m 3 . The average respective exposure levels to bacteria, GNB, and fungi each exceeded 10 4 colony forming units (CFU)/m 3 . The multiple regression models found several factors that significantly explained the variation in levels of inhalation exposure to endotoxin and microorganisms; namely, sex (dust, bacteria, and GNB), job title (GNB and fungi), collection day (dust, bacteria, and GNB), temperature (endotoxin and GNB), humidity (endotoxin and fungi), and region (endotoxin) were significantly associated with exposure to these agents. In addition, the workers' faces were highly contaminated with microorganisms. In conclusion, inhalation exposure to endotoxin and microorganisms was high during waste collection and sorting, which may place workers at risk of developing various health problems, including respiratory complaints.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 76%

An Assessment of Dust, Endotoxin, and Microorganism Exposure during Waste Collection and Sorting

Park

Ryu

Kim³

et al. 2011

Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The results of above studies reveals that waste management is a livelihood of people of low educational levels, with insufficient family income, poor living conditions and mostly performed by male employees in India and also other countries. [16][17][18] The areas where the study population had satisfactory knowledge with more than 70% of the population giving correct answers were segregation of waste (79.16%), place of generation of waste (94.16%), colour coded bags (85%), placement of bins (82.5%), frequency of collection of bags (91.67%). Our result is however different from the study by Bansal and Misra where colour coding was known to 6% of sanitary workers and 7% of them were aware that biomedical waste can be stored for maximum of 48 hours.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rationality in handling biomedical waste: a study on the sanitary workers from a tertiary care hospital in West Bengal

Chaudhuri

Chattopadhyay

Siddalingaiah

2017

Int J Community Med Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Health-care waste contains potentially harmful microorganisms, which can infect hospital patients, health workers and the general public. The knowledge and practices of sanitary workers needs special attention as these individuals are responsible for managing biomedical waste (BMW) from the point of collection to the point of disposal. The objective was to study the socio-demographic and service profile of the study population and assess their knowledge and practices on Biomedical Waste Management. Methods: A predesigned, pretested and validated proforma was used for data collection from 120 sanitary workers in the hospital. An observation checklist was used to assess their practices. Results: Most of the sanitary workers received no formal training before or after joining service (71.67%). Less than 60% of the sanitary workers knew about treatment of waste in hospital, diseases through waste and immunisation. 40.84% of them did not label the bags prior to waste collection and only 30% transported segregated waste in separate trollies. Conclusions: There is a need for enforcement of strict guidelines and measures to improve work safety in hazardous waste collection, transport and handling. Training program on BMW management should be designed to bridge the knowledge attitude and practice gap of sanitary workers.

show abstract

“…The corrective changes should focus on the poor working postures in the upper limbs which include: i) excessive trunk bending (20-60 0 ), ii) neck flexion (>20 0 ), iii) sustained shoulder raising, iv) abduction of upper arms (>90 0 ) and v) wrist bending in extension (>15). Kuijer & Frings-Dresen (2004) describe two possible measures which may limit the manual lifting, carrying and emptying activities, thus address some of the poor postures observed in the present study. The measures are: i) adoption of underground depots where citizens deposit their waste rather than MSWHs and ii) mechanising the waste collection activities.…”

Section: Mswhs' Postural Risk Scoresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The measures are: i) adoption of underground depots where citizens deposit their waste rather than MSWHs and ii) mechanising the waste collection activities. However, such measures may present new risks to MSWHs (Kuijer & Frings-Dresen, 2004). Moreover, the financial challenges of most developing countries may limit the adoption of such measures.…”

Section: Mswhs' Postural Risk Scoresmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Postural Analysis of a Developing Country’s Municipal Solid Waste Handlers and a Reference Group of Hospital General Hands using the RULA Method

Ncube

Voyi

2017

GJHS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Municipal solid waste handlers perform various work activities which may contribute to the onset of work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WRMDs). This study conducted a postural analysis of these workers and a reference group of hospital general hands in order to identify unsafe working postures requiring correction. Methods:The Rapid Upper Limb Assessment (RULA) methodology was used for postural analysis to 30 municipal solid waste handlers (MSWHs) and a reference group of 30 hospital general hands (HGHs) involved in similar work activities. Field observations and photography were used to collect data. Collected data was analysed using STATA version 13. Results:The Mann-Whitney test was used to compare the two groups. Results showed significant differences (p < 0.05) for lifting, carrying and emptying activities. For both groups, the mean postural scores for pushing, pulling and standing activities were mainly in the low risk category and not statistically significant (p > 0.05). Conclusion:Results of the present study show unsafe RULA postural scores to MSWHs with regard to lifting, carrying and emptying of refuse bins. Such scores are suggestive of an elevated risk to developing WRMDs in these workers compared to the reference group.

show abstract

World at work: Refuse collectors

Cited by 58 publications

References 33 publications

An Assessment of Dust, Endotoxin, and Microorganism Exposure during Waste Collection and Sorting

An Assessment of Dust, Endotoxin, and Microorganism Exposure during Waste Collection and Sorting

Rationality in handling biomedical waste: a study on the sanitary workers from a tertiary care hospital in West Bengal

Postural Analysis of a Developing Country’s Municipal Solid Waste Handlers and a Reference Group of Hospital General Hands using the RULA Method

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About