Comparison of the application of new and old specification for occupational health surveillance of radiation workers and analysis of influencing factors
10.3760/cma.j.cn121094-20230316-00084
- VernacularTitle:放射工作人员职业健康监护新旧规范应用比较及影响因素分析
- Author:
Bin ZHOU
1
;
Jiaxiang ZHANG
Author Information
1. 安徽医科大学公共卫生学院职业卫生与环境卫生学系，合肥 230032
- Keywords:
Radiation, ionizing;
Radiation worker;
Occupational health surveillance;
Judgment on worker fitness
- From:
Chinese Journal of Industrial Hygiene and Occupational Diseases
2024;42(5):370-374
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To investigate the impact of the implementation of GBZ 98-2020 "Health Requirements and Surveillance Specifications for Radiation Worker" on the results of occupational health examination for radiation workers.Methods:In April 2022, the subjects of the study were the radiation workers who underwent occupational health examination in Occupational Disease Prevention and Treatment Institute of Hefei. The radiation workers whose registration period was from May 1, 2021 to April 30, 2022 were the new standard group, and the occupational health surveillance standard was GBZ 98-2020 "Health Requirements and Surveillance Specifications for Radiation Worker". The radiationl workers registered from May 1, 2020 to April 30, 2021 were the old standard group, whose occupational health surveillance standards were GBZ 98- 2017 "Health Requirements for Radiation Workers" and GBZ 235-2011 "Specifications for Occupational Health Surveillance for Radiation Workers". To analyze whether there were differences between the two groups in the detection rate of missing items in the examination, re-examination, and the detection rate of occupational contraindications. The radiation workers whose occupational health examination results showed re-examination and/or occupational contraindications were judged to be in the unqualified group. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to find the factors affecting the determination of unqualified group.Results:The missing item detection rate of radiation workers in the new standard group was 3.04% (63/2074) , significantly higher than that in the old standard group (0.68%, 14/2054) ( P<0.05) . The re-examination and occupational contraindications detection rates in the new standard group were 5.93% (123/2074) and 0.58% (12/2074) , respectively, which were significantly lower than those in the old standard group (13.83%, 284/2054) and 2.34% (48/2054) ( P<0.05) . The missing item detection rate of males in the new standard group was 2.78% (40/1440) , which was significantly higher than that in the old standard group (0.72%, 11/1536) ( P<0.05) . The re-examination and occupational contraindications detection rates of males in the new standard group were 3.61% (52/1440) and 0.21% (3/1440) , respectively, which were significantly lower than those in the old standard group (12.17%, 187/1536) and 2.08% (32/1536) ( P<0.05) . The missing item detection rate of females in the new standard group was 3.63% (23/634) , which was significantly higher than that in the old standard group (0.58%, 3/518) ( P<0.05) . The re-examination detection rate of females in the new standard group was 11.20% (71/634) , which was significantly lower than that of females in the old standard group (18.73%, 97/518) ( P<0.05) . Univariate logistic regression analysis showed that gender, radiation classification, determination basis, occupational health examination category, and registration category were all influencing factors for the unqualified occupational health examination results of radiation workers ( P<0.05) . Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that the risk of being judged as unqualified based on the old standard was 2.466 times that of the new standard (95% CI: 1.975-3.080, P<0.05) , and the risk of being judged as unqualified for females was 1.869 times that of males (95% CI: 1.498-2.333, P<0.05) , the risk of being judged as unqualified for radiation workers during and after employment was 0.802 times that of pre-employment individuals (95% CI: 0.650-0.989, P<0.05) , and the risk of being judged as unqualified for re-examined individuals was 4.056 times that of initial examinees (95% CI: 3.161-5.203, P<0.05) . Conclusion:The results of occupational health examination of radiation workers are related to the determination basis, gender, occupational health examination category, and registration category. The implementation of GBZ 98-2020 "Health Requirements and Surveillance Specifications for Radiation Worker" may reduce the detection rate of unqualified personnel.
