No abstract

Action to address workforce functioning and productivity requires a broader approach than the traditional scope of occupational safety and health. Focus on "well-being" may be one way to develop a more encompassing objective. Well-being is widely cited in public policy pronouncements, but often as ". . . and well-being" (e.g., health and well-being). It is generally not defined in policy and rarely operationalized for functional use. Many definitions of well-being exist in the occupational realm. Generally, it is a synonym for health and a summative term to describe a flourishing worker who benefits from a safe, supportive workplace, engages in satisfying work, and enjoys a fulfilling work life. We identified issues for considering well-being in public policy related to workers and the workplace.

The high rates of injury among young workers are a pressing public health issue, especially given the demand of the job market for new workers. Young and new workers experience the highest rates of occupational injuries of any age group. Incorporating occupational safety and health (OSH) information into the more than 20 000 vocational and other workforce preparation programs in the United States might provide a mechanism for reducing work-related injuries and illnesses among young and new workers. We assessed the status of including OSH information or training in workforce preparation programs and found there is an inconsistent emphasis on OSH information.

Translation research in occupational safety and health is the application of scientific investigative approaches to study how the outputs of basic and applied research can be effectively translated into practice and have an impact. This includes the study of the ways in which useful knowledge and interventions are disseminated, adopted, implemented, and institutionalized. In this paper, a 4-stage framework (Development, Testing, Institutionalization, and Evaluation) is presented. Translation research can be used to enhance the use and impact of occupational safety and health knowledge and interventions to protect workers. This type of research has not received much attention in the occupational safety and health field. However, in contemporary society, it is critical to know how to make an impact with the findings and outputs of basic and applied research. This paper provides a novel framework for consideration of how to advance and prioritize translation research for occupational safety and health.

We offer a framework for dissemination of OSH information and underscore the need to focus on the extent to which decision-makers and others receive and use such information. More solid data are also needed on current investments in disseminating, diffusing and applying OSH information and on the utility of that information. Am. J. Ind. Med. 44:515-531, 2003. Published 2003 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

In phase 1 of a large multiyear effort, health communication and health promotion models were used to develop a comprehensive hearing loss prevention training program for carpenters. Additionally, a survey was designed to be used as an evaluation instrument. The models informed an iterative research process in which the authors used key informant interviews, focus groups, and early versions of the survey tool to identify critical issues expected to be relevant to the success of the hearing loss prevention training. Commonly held attitudes and beliefs associated with occupational noise exposure and hearing losses, as well as issues associated with the use or non-use of hearing protectors, were identified. The training program was then specifically constructed to positively shape attitudes, beliefs, and behavioral intentions associated with healthy hearing behaviors - especially those associated with appropriate hearing protector use. The goal was to directly address the key issues and overcome the barriers identified during the formative research phase. The survey was finalized using factor analysis methods and repeated pilot testing. It was designed to be used with the training as an evaluation tool and thus could indicate changes over time in attitudes, beliefs, and behavioral intentions regarding hearing loss prevention. Finally, the training program was fine tuned with industry participation so that its delivery would integrate seamlessly into the existing health and safety training provided to apprentice carpenters. In phase 2, reported elsewhere in this volume, the training program and the survey were tested through a demonstration project at two sites.

Two demonstration projects were conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of a comprehensive training program for carpenters. This training was paired with audiometry and counseling and a survey of attitudes and beliefs in hearing loss prevention. All participants received hearing tests, multimedia instruction on occupational noise exposure/hearing loss, and instruction and practice in using a diverse selection of hearing protection devices (HPDs). A total of 103 apprentice carpenters participated in the Year 1 training, were given a large supply of these HPDs, and instructions on how to get additional free supplies if they ran out during the 1-year interval between initial and follow-up training. Forty-two participants responded to the survey a second time a year later and completed the Year 2 training. Significant test-retest differences were found between the pre-training and the post-training survey scores. Both forms of instruction (individual versus group) produced equivalent outcomes. The results indicated that training was able to bring all apprentice participants up to the same desired level with regard to attitudes, beliefs, and behavioral intentions to use hearing protection properly. It was concluded that the health communication models used to develop the educational and training materials for this effort were extremely effective.

The mandate of ASA Working Group S12/WG11 has been to develop "laboratory and/or field procedure(s) that yield useful estimates of field performance" of hearing protection devices (HPDs). A real-ear attenuation at threshold procedure was selected, devised, tested for one earmuff and three earplugs via an interlaboratory study involving five laboratories and 147 subjects, and incorporated into a new standard that was approved in 1997 [Royster et al., "Development of a new standard laboratory protocol for estimating the field attenuation of hearing protection devices. Part I. Research of Working Group 11, Accredited Standards Committee S 12, Noise," J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 99, 1506-1526; ANSI, S12.6-1997, "American National Standard method for measuring real-ear attenuation of hearing protectors" (American National Standards Institute, New York, 1997)]. The subject-fit methodology of ANSI S12.6-1997 relies upon listeners who are audiometrically proficient, but inexperienced in the use of HPDs. Whenever a new method is adopted, it is important to know the effects of variability on the power of the measurements. In evaluation of protector noise reduction determined by experimenter-fit, informed-user-fit, and subject-fit methods, interlaboratory reproducibility was found to be best for the subject-fit method. Formulas were derived for determining the minimum detectable difference between attenuation measurements and for determining the number of subjects necessary to achieve a selected level of precision. For a precision of 6 dB, the study found that the minimum number of subjects was 4 for the Bilsom UF-1 earmuff, 10 for the E.A.R Classic earplug, 31 for the Willson EP100 earplug, and 22 for the PlasMed V-51R earplug.