4.2 Review

Occupational Demands and Health Effects for Bricklayers and Construction Supervisors: A Systematic Review

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL MEDICINE
卷 54, 期 1, 页码 55-77

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/ajim.20899

关键词

systematic review; construction industry; occupational health; workers' health surveillance

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Knowledge was gathered on occupational demands and health effects of two occupations in the construction industry, bricklayers and supervisors, in order to design a job-specific workers' health surveillance (WHS) for construction workers. Methods We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, HSELINE, NIOSHTIC-2, and Picarta up to December 2008. Results A total of 60 articles were included. Evidence was found for the following demands for bricklayers: energetic load (exceeding 25% heart rate reserve), load on the lower back (exceeding the NIOSH-threshold value of 3.4 kN), repetitive force exertions of the upper extremities, frequent bending with trunk flexion exceeding 60 degrees and working with the arms more than 608 elevated. Environmental demands include: dust and quartz exposure (exceeding the limit values of 3.0 and 0.05 mg/m(3), respectively), vibration and noise (exceeding the limit value of 80 dBA). Bricklayers are at increased risk of lung cancer, low back pain, complaints of arms and legs and getting injuries. Among construction supervisors are walking and standing common physically demanding activities. Psychosocial demands with evidence for supervisors were mental demands, workload, time pressure, working long hours, and social-organizational factors. Supervisors are at increased risk of lung cancer and injuries. Conclusions For bricklayers evidence was found for physical demands and risk on low back pain and complaints of arms and legs, for construction supervisors on psychosocial demands. Both occupations are at increased risk of lung cancer and injuries. Job-specific demands and health effects should be incorporated in WHS for construction workers. Am. J. Ind. Med. 54: 55-77, 2011. (C) 2010 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据