s, Mentor: Lauren A. Murphy, PhD
Graduate Category: Health Sciences Degree Seeking: Doctor of Physical Therapy Abstract ID#: 1708
Examining Safety Climate Percep>on and Health Outcomes in Construc>on Workers Barry Myers PT/s, Mentor: Lauren A. Murphy, PhD
Opportunity
Abstract • The U.S. construcFon industry is one of the most dangerous industries because construcFon workers are at a high risk for injuries and fataliFes. Due to the physical demands, musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) are also a major health concern. • To reduce fataliFes, injuries, and MSDs on construcFon sites, different intervenFons have been implemented, like safety climate or ergonomic intervenFons. TradiFonally, safety climate research has addressed reducing acute injuries by prioriFzing safety in an organizaFon. • In order to help reduce the development of MSDs, applicable trainings and policies related to ergonomic principles are needed. Background The construcFon industry has had more fataliFes than any other occupaFon.1 • According to the Occupa1onal Safety and Health Administra1on (OSHA), there were 4,821 construc1on workers that lost their lives on a worksite in 2014 due to work-related fatali1es.2 • There is a 40% higher rate of nonfatal injuries to occur in the construc1on industry than other industries combined.1 • It has been es1mated that nonfatal injuries in the construc1on industry cost $427 million each year in the United States.1 Aims of Study • Qualita1vely examine the role safety climate plays in influencing chronic outcomes related to MSDs. • Examine workers’ understanding of ergonomics to determine if an ergonomics climate, separate from safety climate, would improve workers’ health outcomes.
Results Themes found in rela>on to Ergonomics Climate: • • •
Pain/wear and tear on body viewed as consequences of being in construc1on Construc1on workers do not think of the long-term effects in regards to developing pain and chronic disabili1es Safety and ergonomics are considered one in the same by workers and ergonomic issues are not given enough a[en1on on construc1on sites
Themes found in rela>on to the Signs of MSDs • Construc1on workers are not aware that early signs and symptoms of pain and injuries could lead to long-term MSDs • Knee and back pain were major complaints, but workers are not given knee pads and are s1ll required to li] heavy objects and/or equipment References 1. Dong XS, Wang X, Largay J. OccupaFonal and non-occupaFonal factors associated with work-related injuries among construcFon workers in the USA. Interna1onal Journal of Occupa1onal and Environmental Health. 2015;21(2):142-150. 2. OccupaFonal Safety and Health AdministraFon. Commonly Used StaFsFcs. Website. h[ps://www.osha.gov/oshstats/ commonstats.html.
Approach
Methods
A total of 52 parFcipants recruited from two construcFon sites in Boston, MA, aged 21 to 71 years, were assigned to 6 focus group sessions to discuss their percepFons of safety, ergonomics, and MSDs. TranscripFons from the focus groups were coded by two researchers to idenFfy common themes using:
Grounded Theory Approach
Open Coding
Axial Coding
Selective Coding
This approach can help understand the construcFon workers’ thoughts and percepFons about safety climate and ergonomics. This will allow for the development of ideas on how to prevent/reduce the occurrence of chronic MSDs in construcFon workers.
Impact
The unique feature about my research is: To understand the difference between safety climate and ergonomics climate in construc1on sites. An ergonomics climate is under reported in the literature and not understood by construc1on workers. This addresses the problems of: • The vast number of long-term MSDs construc1on workers develop on a construc1on site. • Workers are unaware of the early signs and symptoms of long-term injuries. • Construc1on workers are o]en subjected to unsafe condi1ons at various worksites.
Examining Safety Climate Percep>on and Health Outcomes in Construc>on Workers Barry Myers PT/s, Mentor: Lauren A. Murphy, PhD
Opportunity
Abstract • The U.S. construcFon industry is one of the most dangerous industries because construcFon workers are at a high risk for injuries and fataliFes. Due to the physical demands, musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) are also a major health concern. • To reduce fataliFes, injuries, and MSDs on construcFon sites, different intervenFons have been implemented, like safety climate or ergonomic intervenFons. TradiFonally, safety climate research has addressed reducing acute injuries by prioriFzing safety in an organizaFon. • In order to help reduce the development of MSDs, applicable trainings and policies related to ergonomic principles are needed. Background The construcFon industry has had more fataliFes than any other occupaFon.1 • According to the Occupa1onal Safety and Health Administra1on (OSHA), there were 4,821 construc1on workers that lost their lives on a worksite in 2014 due to work-related fatali1es.2 • There is a 40% higher rate of nonfatal injuries to occur in the construc1on industry than other industries combined.1 • It has been es1mated that nonfatal injuries in the construc1on industry cost $427 million each year in the United States.1 Aims of Study • Qualita1vely examine the role safety climate plays in influencing chronic outcomes related to MSDs. • Examine workers’ understanding of ergonomics to determine if an ergonomics climate, separate from safety climate, would improve workers’ health outcomes.
Results Themes found in rela>on to Ergonomics Climate: • • •
Pain/wear and tear on body viewed as consequences of being in construc1on Construc1on workers do not think of the long-term effects in regards to developing pain and chronic disabili1es Safety and ergonomics are considered one in the same by workers and ergonomic issues are not given enough a[en1on on construc1on sites
Themes found in rela>on to the Signs of MSDs • Construc1on workers are not aware that early signs and symptoms of pain and injuries could lead to long-term MSDs • Knee and back pain were major complaints, but workers are not given knee pads and are s1ll required to li] heavy objects and/or equipment References 1. Dong XS, Wang X, Largay J. OccupaFonal and non-occupaFonal factors associated with work-related injuries among construcFon workers in the USA. Interna1onal Journal of Occupa1onal and Environmental Health. 2015;21(2):142-150. 2. OccupaFonal Safety and Health AdministraFon. Commonly Used StaFsFcs. Website. h[ps://www.osha.gov/oshstats/ commonstats.html.
Approach
Methods
A total of 52 parFcipants recruited from two construcFon sites in Boston, MA, aged 21 to 71 years, were assigned to 6 focus group sessions to discuss their percepFons of safety, ergonomics, and MSDs. TranscripFons from the focus groups were coded by two researchers to idenFfy common themes using:
Grounded Theory Approach
Open Coding
Axial Coding
Selective Coding
This approach can help understand the construcFon workers’ thoughts and percepFons about safety climate and ergonomics. This will allow for the development of ideas on how to prevent/reduce the occurrence of chronic MSDs in construcFon workers.
Impact
The unique feature about my research is: To understand the difference between safety climate and ergonomics climate in construc1on sites. An ergonomics climate is under reported in the literature and not understood by construc1on workers. This addresses the problems of: • The vast number of long-term MSDs construc1on workers develop on a construc1on site. • Workers are unaware of the early signs and symptoms of long-term injuries. • Construc1on workers are o]en subjected to unsafe condi1ons at various worksites.
