Industrial hygienists often observe workers to determine who should be measured based on a predicted exposure level. Such evaluations are usually based on real-time observation, yet surprisingly little research has been conducted on what determinants of exposure industrial hygienists use to rank workers and whether the ranking is accurate. Accuracy of the ranking may also be affected by the observation process, which is limited when conditions in the workers' immediate environment are rapidly changing. An alternative to realtime observation is videotaping workers and evaluating the tapes at a later date. A pilot study was conducted using previously collected data to determine if workers could be ranked by exposure level utilizing a scoring system to rate videotaped work practices. Six farmers had been videotaped and their dermal exposures measured as they applied insecticide to hogs. In this study, scores were developed to rate the farmers' working conditions by exposure level. Two types of determinants were used to describe exposure: touching and work practices. Touching included the number of times parts of the body had contact with surfaces possibly contaminated with insecticide. Work practices included the types of clothing and protective equipment worn as well as specific practices used by the farmer (e.g., application method). Two raters conducted independent assessments of the videotape using the same criteria. One rater reviewed the tape twice. Agreement between the raters for the "touching" score was weak (intra-class coefficient (ICC) = 0.28), but there was excellent agreement between the two raters (ICC = 0.92) for overall quality of work practices. As expected, a greater number of touches was moderately correlated with an increase in total exposure (r s = 0.60)and there was a weak inverse relationship between protective work practices and the exposure under the clothing (r s = 0.26). All other relationships with exposure level were contrary to what was expected. Since videotapes pro vide the industrial hygienist with a record of work events and can capture details that might otherwise be missed or not considered they may play a useful role in exposure assessment, especially if carefully developed procedures are followed to overcome the limitations found by this pilot study.
Applied Occupational and Environmental Hygiene
Volume 16, 2001 - Issue 10